Before I rip into the problems I will say what I like. The Bard is is good imo. I have a maybe change for the College. The new feats are mostly fine.
College of Lore problem: It doesn’t feel like the 5e Lore Bard. Honestly that might be okay but I have a fix for that if we want to push it back into something more familiar.
6th Lvl Feature change- Songs of Lore- You may choose one Cantrip and one spell of 1st level or above from any spell list. That spell must be of a level you can prepapre with Bard spell slots. It is always prepared and doesn’t count against the number of spells you can prepare. You may change this cantrip and spell whenever you complete a long rest.
This feels more inline with 5e Bard, but we would be giving up an excellent 6th level feature in cunning inspiration.
Ranger problem: there is a lot to unpack. Doesn’t have the feel of a Ranger. Steps on the Rogues toes too much now. Hunter’s Mark is too strong early doesn’t really fulfill Favored Enemy for the entire game. Favored Foe is weak.
‘Favored Enemy- scales, 1st level grants HM always prepared and doesn’t count against spells prepared. 3rd level HM no longer requires concentration. 7th level you can use study and search actions as a bonus action against marked targets. You have advantage on the roll. 11th HM damage is a d8.17th HM damage is a d10
1st Lvl Expertise becomes Natural Explorer- You gain proficiency and expertise in Nature and Survival skills. If you already have proficiency in the skill choose another Ranger skill to gain proficiency in. If you already have expertise in the skill choose any skill you have proficiency and gain expertise in that skill. You also gain proficiency in cartographer tools or navigators tools.
Foe Slayer- either make the damage static Wis mod increase that it is in 5e or Proficiency bonus to marked target.
This allows HM to not be too strong a lvl 1, and worth staying for all the perks beyond 3rd level. I originally thought steal hunters lore from the subclass and put it here for the 7th level HM boon for all rangers but saw an opportunity to work with the new codified search and study actions. Natural Explore instead of straight expertise because sadly I’m seeing if the mechanics don’t force you toward the flavor people will just optimize. Also the Ranger was feeling too Rogue like with open expertise.
Rogue problem: Can’t sneak attack on opportunity attacks or in special occasions on other people’s turns. Their expertise doesn’t feel special any more (partially fixed with Ranger change) Thief needs a little boost also.
Expertise- allow rogues to also choose tools for expertise from this list if they have proficiency in the tool- Disguise Kit, Forgery Kit, Jeweler’s tools, and Thieves tools
Sneak attack returns to once per turn when you attack with a finesse or ranged weapon.
Thief fast hands- return interact with an object as part of fast hands cunning action.
Movement problem- it’s clunky and I just don’t like it. Jump as an action is bot good and bad.
Any movement consumes all speed types up to your highest speed. So if you have 30 speed, 10 climb, 40 swim. You can’t walk 10ft to a wall then climb it with your climb speed because it’s already been used while walking. But you could climb a 10ft wall, walk 20ft to some water, and swim 10ft. Taking the Dash action gives you second block of movement that is subtracted from separately. So you could walk 20ft to a wall. Take the dash action. Climb 10ft up the wall. At this moment you have 2 blocks of movement to account for that are separate. One has 10ft speed or 20 swim remaining and the other has 20 speed or 30 walk remaining. Now I need to figure out how to say that plainly so it’s easily understood.
Jump becomes its own special action but can be used in place of an action, a bonus action or movement if you haven’t used any this turn. If used as a bonus action you only clear a distance equal to half the roll. You may only use Jump once per turn no matter if you replaced an action, bonus action or movement.
Feat problem- Crossbow expert is broken and Ritual Caster is bad.
Crossbow expert should return to its 5e version and a new feat introduced to handle two crossbows and sword and crossbow. Which is what the UA version does right now and not very well unless you are an artificer with repeating shot or Thri-keen. Otherwise once you fire you can’t get ammunition because your hands are full.
Ritual Caster drop quick ritual and return the book and ability to learn more rituals. Even if it means it’s limited it to 1 ritual when you first get the book and you have to seek out the others.
That’s all I got. I’m sure as everyone keeps playtesting and talking about this more problems will come up. Most can be fixed and I’m sure we will end up with a product we all will enjoy. Even if we don’t all get exactly what we want.
Just going to focus on classes for the time being, might review more later.
Bard
- Request for clarification on how bardic inspiration works for healing a target reduced to 0 HP, should they fall prone or remain standing?
Presumably they should fall prone but this might be an oversight and should be better clarified.
- Level 2 songs of restoration: you can swap a single spell from the songs of restoration feature for any Abjuration spell of the same level from the Arcane, Divine and Primal lists. You can decide which spell is swapped for another during a long rest.
Essentially acts as a more limited version of magical secrets, but earlier on and gives a bit more choice on what spells a Bard wants. Maybe they want mass cure wounds instead of greater restoration.
- Level 6 college of lore feature addition: Add Charisma to Bardic Inspiration dice roll when using the heal option
The healing option is pretty weak in my opinion and so having a college which does it better...
Ranger
- Decrease Hunter's mark to 1d4
additionally will likely be recommending similar for Hex with Warlock, the current favored enemy is very strong and hunter's mark is not a bad pick for most ranged characters to begin with.
- Favored Enemy bestow additional benefits: at ranger level 5, upcasting hunter's mark to 2nd level additionally increases damage to 1d6; At ranger level 9 upcasting hunter's mark to 3rd level additionally increases damage to 1d8; At ranger level 13 upcasting hunter's mark to 4th level increases damage to 1d10 and at ranger level 17 upcasting hunter's mark to 5th level increases damage to 1d12.
Encourages rangers to use higher leveled spell slots, right now, the duration isn't enough but this bonus should remain restricted to rangers. Additionally Ranger right now gets most of it's damage from it's level 1-5 features, this spread it out a bit better and gives them more damage in later tiers of play. Right now, Ranger is better than 5E but it would be a stronger option for multiclassing to levels 1, 4 or 5 than it would for taking to level 20.
- Level 7, Roving additional bonus, As a bonus action you can ignore the effects of difficult terrain
some form of ignore difficult terrain should exist for ranger, this I think is a good compromise.
- Level 13 Nature's Veil, you become invisible AND move silently, duration used on spell slot used. 1st level til end of current turn, 2nd level until end of your next turn, 3rd level lasts until the end of two turns from when used, 4th until end of three turns from when used and finally 5th until end of four turns from when used.
Invisible is already going to be slightly limited, with moving silently you can move around a bit more freely. Also this is going to encourage burning 1st and 2nd level spell slots only in it's current form. It is basically a concentration free version of greater invisibility but you'd think higher leveled spell slots should do more.
- new level 18 ability, Favored Target, you gain +1 to attack rolls against the current target of your hunter's mark and you critical on a 19 against that target.
Ranger's damage increase in Tier 3&4 is actually slightly subpar, their Tier 1 is good tho (so much it carries them through Tier 2), this gives that extra kick Ranger needs.
- Hunter level 10 additional ability: When you cast conjure barrage, you can exclude a number of creatures from taking damage in it's area of effect, up to your proficiency bonus.
Makes the spell more useful, especially for backliners.
Rogue
- level 1, Sneak Attack update: Once per round, when you perform a weapon attack which is not done as part of a spell, you can deal extra damage.... etc.
Basically allow it to work on opportunity attacks and readied attacks, more so if they are from hidden (thus have advantage).
- level 11 Reliable Talent additional ability: you additionally gain this benefit to initiative rolls
Rogues probably are already doing well on initiative, this one just cements them as the fast actors, would however make alert even more powerful in current state.
- Level 17 Elusive: additionally when an enemy misses you or an ally within 5 feet of you, If you are using a Finesse weapon, you can use your reaction to attack that enemy, this attack additionally does 3d6 bonus damage if it hits.
Rogue could also use a tier 4 boost to damage, past the turning a single failed attack into crit of level 18
- level 18 Stroke of luck update, also refresh on initiative roll (not much of a difference)
Just since utility to create a crit, if you get two encounters without a short rest, would be nice to get the feature back for the 2nd.
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
Just going to focus on classes for the time being, might review more later.
Bard
- Request for clarification on how bardic inspiration works for healing a target reduced to 0 HP, should they fall prone or remain standing?
Presumably they should fall prone but this might be an oversight and should be better clarified.
- Level 2 songs of restoration: you can swap a single spell from the songs of restoration feature for any Abjuration spell of the same level from the Arcane, Divine and Primal lists. You can decide which spell is swapped for another during a long rest.
Essentially acts as a more limited version of magical secrets, but earlier on and gives a bit more choice on what spells a Bard wants. Maybe they want mass cure wounds instead of greater restoration.
- Level 6 college of lore feature addition: Add Charisma to Bardic Inspiration dice roll when using the heal option
The healing option is pretty weak in my opinion and so having a college which does it better...
Ranger
- Decrease Hunter's mark to 1d4
additionally will likely be recommending similar for Hex with Warlock, the current favored enemy is very strong and hunter's mark is not a bad pick for most ranged characters to begin with.
- Favored Enemy bestow additional benefits: at ranger level 5, upcasting hunter's mark to 2nd level additionally increases damage to 1d6; At ranger level 9 upcasting hunter's mark to 3rd level additionally increases damage to 1d8; At ranger level 13 upcasting hunter's mark to 4th level increases damage to 1d10 and at ranger level 17 upcasting hunter's mark to 5th level increases damage to 1d12.
Encourages rangers to use higher leveled spell slots, right now, the duration isn't enough but this bonus should remain restricted to rangers. Additionally Ranger right now gets most of it's damage from it's level 1-5 features, this spread it out a bit better and gives them more damage in later tiers of play. Right now, Ranger is better than 5E but it would be a stronger option for multiclassing to levels 1, 4 or 5 than it would for taking to level 20.
- Level 7, Roving additional bonus, As a bonus action you can ignore the effects of difficult terrain
some form of ignore difficult terrain should exist for ranger, this I think is a good compromise.
- Level 13 Nature's Veil, you become invisible AND move silently, duration used on spell slot used. 1st level til end of current turn, 2nd level until end of your next turn, 3rd level lasts until the end of two turns from when used, 4th until end of three turns from when used and finally 5th until end of four turns from when used.
Invisible is already going to be slightly limited, with moving silently you can move around a bit more freely. Also this is going to encourage burning 1st and 2nd level spell slots only in it's current form. It is basically a concentration free version of greater invisibility but you'd think higher leveled spell slots should do more.
- new level 18 ability, Favored Target, you gain +1 to attack rolls against the current target of your hunter's mark and you critical on a 19 against that target.
Ranger's damage increase in Tier 3&4 is actually slightly subpar, their Tier 1 is good tho (so much it carries them through Tier 2), this gives that extra kick Ranger needs.
- Hunter level 10 additional ability: When you cast conjure barrage, you can exclude a number of creatures from taking damage in it's area of effect, up to your proficiency bonus.
Makes the spell more useful, especially for backliners.
Rogue
- level 1, Sneak Attack update: Once per round, when you perform a weapon attack which is not done as part of a spell, you can deal extra damage.... etc.
Basically allow it to work on opportunity attacks and readied attacks, more so if they are from hidden (thus have advantage).
- level 11 Reliable Talent additional ability: you additionally gain this benefit to initiative rolls
Rogues probably are already doing well on initiative, this one just cements them as the fast actors, would however make alert even more powerful in current state.
- Level 17 Elusive: additionally when an enemy misses you or an ally within 5 feet of you, If you are using a Finesse weapon, you can use your reaction to attack that enemy, this attack additionally does 3d6 bonus damage if it hits.
Rogue could also use a tier 4 boost to damage, past the turning a single failed attack into crit of level 18
- level 18 Stroke of luck update, also refresh on initiative roll (not much of a difference)
Just since utility to create a crit, if you get two encounters without a short rest, would be nice to get the feature back for the 2nd.
I can’t believe I forgot how much I didn’t like conjure barrage.
Bard: To me the cutting worlds ability always felt out of place for a subclass focused on lore, and the new version leans into it even more. Maybe move it to another subclass and come up with some more lore based powers
Ranger: Foe slayer should be 2d6 damage instead of 1d10. 2d6 is psychologically more satisfying then 1d10. if you roll up to 5 on the d10 you might think you could have done better then that with my old d6. But if you roll 2d6 you know that the damage of the 2nd d6 is damage you would not have done if you rolled just 1 dice
Rogue: Many players used readied action with a trigger like I attack the first creature that gets adjacent to one of my allies to get sneak in the first round, this is no longer possible with the new rules. Add Enemies that have not acted yet during the first round of combat to the list of things that give you sneak attack
Unified spell list: If you have exceptions to spell selection like the Ranger and bard have you kill any advantage you would have gained from a unified spell list, and in effect created class specific spell lists. With the exception that these class spell list are not clearly marked in the book and players need to find and print a version online to put in the back of their PHB.
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
You’re probably right about the survey. I would rather see what the community thinks and see their ideas about design. WotC probably doesn’t care. They have paid design team and we should like the ideas they come up with. When every says Favored Enemy is too strong we will end up with the same crappy fix we got in Tasha’s.
I like the FLAVOR of the lore subclass being forced to take the intelligence based stuff, but not any of the rest of it. The cutting words feels disjointed from the "Lore" side of things. Bard features come at weird levels. Songs of restorations should probably just go away and the bard spell casting should just include Abjuration and Necromancy from the Primal Spell list.
Rogues need SOMETHING going into T2 of play to really make them stand out from the other experts.
Rangers have too much early not enough late game, and they lost a lot of flavor. I miss Land Strider. If hunter's mark wasn't a spell the need for first level spells at level 1 wouldn't be there and you could ease the Ranger into spell casting easier rather than having martial weapons, armor, expertise and spells all at level 1.
level 4 feats all being half feats makes it feel punishing to take a level 1 feat at level 4. By decoupling the +1 from the feats, some 4th level feats will fit better as first level feats and there will be less punishment for taking a lower level feat at 4th level.
Compared to other classes (and the old rules), bard is way less useful until 7th level, and doesn't feel unique or interesting until 11th level (when most games have already ended). For a class that is basically designed to enable the rest of the party, this seems like a pretty big miss.
Rogue should be able to sneak attack once per-round with no other restrictions (resetting the ability at the start of their turn).
I have some other minor gripes, but those are the big ones.
Unified spell list: If you have exceptions to spell selection like the Ranger and bard have you kill any advantage you would have gained from a unified spell list, and in effect created class specific spell lists. With the exception that these class spell list are not clearly marked in the book and players need to find and print a version online to put in the back of their PHB.
I really have to agree with this. While it cuts down on space, there really is no purpose to unified lists if each class still has specific spells they can cast. It just becomes more of a pain in the hindparts for the players and DMs to separate it out.
Also, the thing Wizards needs to keep in mind is when designing and changing things, is to keep things simple enough but offer enough of an explanation for new players. Don't assume everyone knows what you (Wizards) is talking about.
Yeah the whole spell list this seems like an overreaction to a minor problem. Any time a new book like Tasha's comes out, they struggled to tell us who could use a new spell. They could make a chart, but then were afraid to mention them in a different book in case you didn't own that one. I think they really just wanted to be able to add new spells and say "This one is arcane, that one is divine" and not have to spell it out for each character.
But honestly, that only helps them at the expense of the player. I don't think anyone had a real problem with individual class spell lists. But trying to sort through them all every time you prepare a new day's spells is going to be a real pain without computer tools. Not to mention the fact that spells are having their schools changed strangely just to make them fit with the class they want.
Movement, allow people to mix movement type, jump shouldn't be an action, search/study should not be actions, hide change requirement to 1/2 cover/lightly obscured, add facing so people can sneak behind or up on people even out of cover/concealment.
I don't like the change to sneak attack as they were already behind on damage compared to other damage classes. There three suggestions I have for sneak attack.
1. Revert sneak attack to the way it was in 5e.
2. Increase sneak attack damage to d8 or d10 . This may bring them back line to the amount of damage that they originally dealt if they don't want them to sneak attack outside their turn and can't use blade cantrips like booming blade.
3. Change sneak attack to "once per round when you make an attack," this will make it so they can get a sneak attack on a ready action, AoO, or with blade cantrips. Also give them some type of battle maneuver specific to rogues that also adds a damage die to rogues on their attacks along with special maneuvers only available to specific subclasses.
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
Have to agree, keep write in's to short sentences nobody is gonna read a paragraph thesis on the change a single player would make.
So if your feedback is mid but you think it'd be good with your amazing change simply put it at dissatisfied and put "this feels bad to use" wotc isn't looking for ideas
Hm.... I don't care enough about known vs prepared spells to talk about that. Swapping out spells daily isn't something I'm big on.
Bard
Overall, I like the bard but for three things. The spell list needs fixing - either new list or DIET schools from any list, or something else. Not enough BI for all the stuff they want to do with it - need short rest and cannibalize spell slot option for more. Lore bard doesn't feel like its, well, got anything to do with Lore. Theme fail. A bit annoyed I can't take both bow and sword smite abilities with Magical Secrets at level 10 anymore, but if I'm going sword or bow bard, I guess I'll just use Magic Initiate and don't do mixed weapons on the same subclass.
Ranger
Its pretty good, I have no real complaints. I know some people claim its flavorless, but I don't have that issue. The only things I have an issue with is that Hunters Mark + TWFing is too strong, so Hunter's Mark needs to be nerfed a bit, and I'd love to see that Conjure Barrage rebalanced so its a good feature for Hunter. I'd also like to see the Hunter feature that lets me see Vulnerabilities, Immunities, etc also give me HP. No problem or cares about spells.
Rogue
Not much changed, imho. Some stuff got shuffled around, no biggie. The so-called sneak attack nerfs never really applied to my table, so it doesn't bother me - I will mention that I'd appreciate them switching it to once a round instead of only on their turn, though. I like getting another feat at 10, and I'm going to suggest even more feats everywhere for all four martials as balancing method with casters. Supreme Sneak is nice... if you're TWFing in melee. Archer rogues get nothing in return.
I'm more bothered by the lack of crossbows and Uncanny Dodge only reducing one attack - I like to see that kind of thing last a round, like the Shield spell does. Same feedback I will give for the Defensive Duelist feat. And speaking of feats...
Feats
Now then. Overall, I like the changes once again. No more Power Attack domination. I think that's good. I like breaking up the feats by level, but only stopping at 1, 4, 20 is half-assed. Lets see 1, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 feats.
Lightly armored is a bit too strong on its own. And, for all the people gripping about casters not wearing armor... I like that trope. Sorry.
I don't actually like Sharp Shooter getting to ignore people in melee with them. Shooting at enemies in melee? Yes, ignore that cover. But I want there to be a balance between crossbow master and sharpshooter, where one is good at close range and the other at long range, not both being able to do both with only a single feat. "Take this to remove all drawbacks and tactical considerations." Speaking of crossbow... I assume the ammo thing was a mistake and will be corrected.
Defensive Duelist should be all round, on par with Shield spell, not a single attack. Scales bad at higher levels. Dual Wielder should give that +1 Defense again. The whole point of that was to make it feel like your offhand weapon was a tiny pseudo-shield. Needs to stay for that reason alone.
Not a fan of Ritual Caster feat. Just feels off to me.
Level 20 feats.... honestly, most of them just feel BAD. They're literally called epic boons but feel... less than epic. Some of them are worse than things you get at level 1.
Spells
I've already said my bit about how I don't like Bard getting shoved into Arcane because they lose a lot of thematic options, but I don't mind the Ranger/Druid mix. The only issue with spell preparation is that I know more than a few people that have anxiety and avoid classes with spell prep. So, for their sake, there needs to be a bit of a middle ground. Spells known tend to get screwed over, and spells prepared causes issues with part of the D&D player base.
Actions / Index
Lots of people complaining about Jump, but... well, I have no problems with dangerous jumps. There's good arguments about making it a full action in the middle of combat being an issue, but I'd personally rather have the default be an action and Monks/Barbs getting the jump as a bonus action. I'm more concerned about both Acrobatics and Athletics being used to jump. Like... are we destroying all differences between the two completely?
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
Have to agree, keep write in's to short sentences nobody is gonna read a paragraph thesis on the change a single player would make.
So if your feedback is mid but you think it'd be good with your amazing change simply put it at dissatisfied and put "this feels bad to use" wotc isn't looking for ideas
If I could take a minute to build on this idea a little, I hope it helps to understand some of what might be going on behind the scenes. I have no idea what their team's process is for going through these surveys. But my daily work involves analyzing large piles of data, mostly written as long form feedback and records, so it is probably very similar to what they must be looking at.
First, the rating you give will be very important. It is the only piece of hard data they will get. This is how they will filter out what to focus their energy on. Any feature with mostly Satisfied or Very Satisfied responses will likely see no changes. They will set those aside as 'job well done' and turn their attention on the parts that people don't like. Likewise, as participants in the survey, we should focus on the things we really have a problem with.
Next, for the features with negative scores, someone will likely be tasked with categorizing the written responses. They will know which ones we don't like, but they need more data to know WHY we don't like it. Focus on explaining your problems with a feature over possible solutions. Again, I have no idea what process they will use, but example categories might be:
Overpowered - the feature is too strong
Underpowered - the feature is too weak
Flavor - the feature doesn't match the fantasy
Confusing - the rules aren't well explained
Loopholes - there are unforseen consequences the way it is written
Once they have these categories, they will then focus on the top 80% of complaints for each feature. Those are the ones that someone will actually read in depth. As others have said, they probably aren't looking for ideas. Feel free to give them briefly, they might even be inspired by one every now and then. But there is a character limit for a reason.
It's more important to make your first sentence your Problem Statement to help them categorize the negative feedback. For example - 'The rules for Hiding are too confusing," or "Sneak Attack damage feels weak without our old tricks." Then offer details on specific questions you have, if you want to.
Change the wording on Favored Enemy from "don't have to concentrate on hunter's Mark" to "you gain advantage on concentration checks when concentrating on hunters mark.
Being able to deal 6d6+mod at level 1 is more broken than being able to sneak attack on opportunity attack. This rates overpowered and loophole.
Change the wording on Favored Enemy from "don't have to concentrate on hunter's Mark" to "you gain advantage on concentration checks when concentrating on hunters mark.
Being able to deal 6d6+mod at level 1 is more broken than being able to sneak attack on opportunity attack. This rates overpowered and loophole.
Or heck, you could even say they automatically succeed on all checks to concentrate on Hunter's Mark. This would mean they could keep it up, but at least could not concentrate on another spell (such as Hex) at the same time.
Edit: sorry this was not the proper thread for me to make a response like this. I have instead responded on the Hunter's Mark thread now.
Change the wording on Favored Enemy from "don't have to concentrate on hunter's Mark" to "you gain advantage on concentration checks when concentrating on hunters mark.
Being able to deal 6d6+mod at level 1 is more broken than being able to sneak attack on opportunity attack. This rates overpowered and loophole.
not sure where you're getting 6d6+mod at level 1, it'd be 4d6+mod at level 1 if you used two short swords, perhaps you confused that for level 5 when ranger gets extra attack. It is however a big problem with Ranger right now that they get all of their best features by level 5 and then nothing for damage until level 13, which is a feature that conflicts with hunter's mark for the bonus action, and then again not until 18 when you get 1d10 hunter's mark which basically is only adding around ~4.2 DPR; Meanwhile rogues can turn a missed attack into a critical hit or bards get to regains charges of their bardic inspiration every time initiative is rolled, even if there was no short rest or anything. Bardic inspiration scales with both Bard Level & Proficiency and a rogue's sneak attack adds a 1d6 every 2 levels. Which is the real issue with hunter's mark, it's a flat bonus and doesn't scale properly at all.
Bard: To me the cutting worlds ability always felt out of place for a subclass focused on lore, and the new version leans into it even more. Maybe move it to another subclass and come up with some more lore based powers
Ranger: Foe slayer should be 2d6 damage instead of 1d10. 2d6 is psychologically more satisfying then 1d10. if you roll up to 5 on the d10 you might think you could have done better then that with my old d6. But if you roll 2d6 you know that the damage of the 2nd d6 is damage you would not have done if you rolled just 1 dice
Rogue: Many players used readied action with a trigger like I attack the first creature that gets adjacent to one of my allies to get sneak in the first round, this is no longer possible with the new rules. Add Enemies that have not acted yet during the first round of combat to the list of things that give you sneak attack
Unified spell list: If you have exceptions to spell selection like the Ranger and bard have you kill any advantage you would have gained from a unified spell list, and in effect created class specific spell lists. With the exception that these class spell list are not clearly marked in the book and players need to find and print a version online to put in the back of their PHB.
As far as the unified spell lists go I am completely fine with them. That said I do believe they need to write out each spell list for each class. I get that they are gearing up for a VTT and keeping DDB toolset so you can just filter by your class, but for any still doing it the old fashioned way, a written out list for each class would be nice.
I do find it helpful for things like the magic initiate feat, you just pick divine, primal, arcane, or for any spells, feats, magic items that they may add, that would have used a “pick from bard, cleric, Druid, sorcerer, wizard, warlock spell list” It broadens your options this way.
When Tasha’s came out and there were additional spell lists, like for the aberrant mind or Clockwork sorcerer, they only added PHB spells so people were only dependent on the core rule books. This would still be an issue going forward so it doesn’t help with that.
But seems like digital will be the default in how they approach the “book” design
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
That's how it is. If anyone wants to suggest design changes, feel free to do so. But it is a waste of time. WoTC already pays money to various people for that. What they want from us is that we tell them what we like and what we don't. In no way are they asking us to redesign the game, and they absolutely don't care about our design suggestions. Which is logical, on the other hand.
If you want to be effective and not waste your time, do what Yurei1453 suggests. And you will also be more useful for the testplay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Before I rip into the problems I will say what I like. The Bard is is good imo. I have a maybe change for the College. The new feats are mostly fine.
College of Lore problem: It doesn’t feel like the 5e Lore Bard. Honestly that might be okay but I have a fix for that if we want to push it back into something more familiar.
This feels more inline with 5e Bard, but we would be giving up an excellent 6th level feature in cunning inspiration.
Ranger problem: there is a lot to unpack. Doesn’t have the feel of a Ranger. Steps on the Rogues toes too much now. Hunter’s Mark is too strong early doesn’t really fulfill Favored Enemy for the entire game. Favored Foe is weak.
This allows HM to not be too strong a lvl 1, and worth staying for all the perks beyond 3rd level. I originally thought steal hunters lore from the subclass and put it here for the 7th level HM boon for all rangers but saw an opportunity to work with the new codified search and study actions. Natural Explore instead of straight expertise because sadly I’m seeing if the mechanics don’t force you toward the flavor people will just optimize. Also the Ranger was feeling too Rogue like with open expertise.
Rogue problem: Can’t sneak attack on opportunity attacks or in special occasions on other people’s turns. Their expertise doesn’t feel special any more (partially fixed with Ranger change) Thief needs a little boost also.
Movement problem- it’s clunky and I just don’t like it. Jump as an action is bot good and bad.
Feat problem- Crossbow expert is broken and Ritual Caster is bad.
That’s all I got. I’m sure as everyone keeps playtesting and talking about this more problems will come up. Most can be fixed and I’m sure we will end up with a product we all will enjoy. Even if we don’t all get exactly what we want.
Just going to focus on classes for the time being, might review more later.
Bard
- Request for clarification on how bardic inspiration works for healing a target reduced to 0 HP, should they fall prone or remain standing?
Presumably they should fall prone but this might be an oversight and should be better clarified.
- Level 2 songs of restoration: you can swap a single spell from the songs of restoration feature for any Abjuration spell of the same level from the Arcane, Divine and Primal lists. You can decide which spell is swapped for another during a long rest.
Essentially acts as a more limited version of magical secrets, but earlier on and gives a bit more choice on what spells a Bard wants. Maybe they want mass cure wounds instead of greater restoration.
- Level 6 college of lore feature addition: Add Charisma to Bardic Inspiration dice roll when using the heal option
The healing option is pretty weak in my opinion and so having a college which does it better...
Ranger
- Decrease Hunter's mark to 1d4
additionally will likely be recommending similar for Hex with Warlock, the current favored enemy is very strong and hunter's mark is not a bad pick for most ranged characters to begin with.
- Favored Enemy bestow additional benefits: at ranger level 5, upcasting hunter's mark to 2nd level additionally increases damage to 1d6; At ranger level 9 upcasting hunter's mark to 3rd level additionally increases damage to 1d8; At ranger level 13 upcasting hunter's mark to 4th level increases damage to 1d10 and at ranger level 17 upcasting hunter's mark to 5th level increases damage to 1d12.
Encourages rangers to use higher leveled spell slots, right now, the duration isn't enough but this bonus should remain restricted to rangers. Additionally Ranger right now gets most of it's damage from it's level 1-5 features, this spread it out a bit better and gives them more damage in later tiers of play. Right now, Ranger is better than 5E but it would be a stronger option for multiclassing to levels 1, 4 or 5 than it would for taking to level 20.
- Level 7, Roving additional bonus, As a bonus action you can ignore the effects of difficult terrain
some form of ignore difficult terrain should exist for ranger, this I think is a good compromise.
- Level 13 Nature's Veil, you become invisible AND move silently, duration used on spell slot used. 1st level til end of current turn, 2nd level until end of your next turn, 3rd level lasts until the end of two turns from when used, 4th until end of three turns from when used and finally 5th until end of four turns from when used.
Invisible is already going to be slightly limited, with moving silently you can move around a bit more freely. Also this is going to encourage burning 1st and 2nd level spell slots only in it's current form. It is basically a concentration free version of greater invisibility but you'd think higher leveled spell slots should do more.
- new level 18 ability, Favored Target, you gain +1 to attack rolls against the current target of your hunter's mark and you critical on a 19 against that target.
Ranger's damage increase in Tier 3&4 is actually slightly subpar, their Tier 1 is good tho (so much it carries them through Tier 2), this gives that extra kick Ranger needs.
- Hunter level 10 additional ability: When you cast conjure barrage, you can exclude a number of creatures from taking damage in it's area of effect, up to your proficiency bonus.
Makes the spell more useful, especially for backliners.
Rogue
- level 1, Sneak Attack update: Once per round, when you perform a weapon attack which is not done as part of a spell, you can deal extra damage.... etc.
Basically allow it to work on opportunity attacks and readied attacks, more so if they are from hidden (thus have advantage).
- level 11 Reliable Talent additional ability: you additionally gain this benefit to initiative rolls
Rogues probably are already doing well on initiative, this one just cements them as the fast actors, would however make alert even more powerful in current state.
- Level 17 Elusive: additionally when an enemy misses you or an ally within 5 feet of you, If you are using a Finesse weapon, you can use your reaction to attack that enemy, this attack additionally does 3d6 bonus damage if it hits.
Rogue could also use a tier 4 boost to damage, past the turning a single failed attack into crit of level 18
- level 18 Stroke of luck update, also refresh on initiative roll (not much of a difference)
Just since utility to create a crit, if you get two encounters without a short rest, would be nice to get the feature back for the 2nd.
Word to the wise: Wizards doesn't pay attention to your write-in answers. At best they have a keyword scraper look for things that get said a lot and use that aggregate data. If you want to be effective in your feedback, be ruthless with your numeric ratings - use the 'Dissatisfied' buttons a lot more. Leave short messages in the wrrite-ins that speak to your play experience, rather than trying to foist design suggestions. Things like "Sneak Attack is a lot less fun", "miss lore flavor on Favored Enemy", "Lore subclass too focused on a rare resource", and the like. Don't suggest design ideas, Wizards won't read them and won't care about/implement them if they do. Talk about what you liked and what you didn't like.
Please do not contact or message me.
I can’t believe I forgot how much I didn’t like conjure barrage.
some thing quickly of the top of my head :
Bard:
To me the cutting worlds ability always felt out of place for a subclass focused on lore, and the new version leans into it even more.
Maybe move it to another subclass and come up with some more lore based powers
Ranger:
Foe slayer should be 2d6 damage instead of 1d10.
2d6 is psychologically more satisfying then 1d10. if you roll up to 5 on the d10 you might think you could have done better then that with my old d6.
But if you roll 2d6 you know that the damage of the 2nd d6 is damage you would not have done if you rolled just 1 dice
Rogue:
Many players used readied action with a trigger like I attack the first creature that gets adjacent to one of my allies to get sneak in the first round, this is no longer possible with the new rules.
Add Enemies that have not acted yet during the first round of combat to the list of things that give you sneak attack
Unified spell list:
If you have exceptions to spell selection like the Ranger and bard have you kill any advantage you would have gained from a unified spell list, and in effect created class specific spell lists.
With the exception that these class spell list are not clearly marked in the book and players need to find and print a version online to put in the back of their PHB.
You’re probably right about the survey. I would rather see what the community thinks and see their ideas about design. WotC probably doesn’t care. They have paid design team and we should like the ideas they come up with. When every says Favored Enemy is too strong we will end up with the same crappy fix we got in Tasha’s.
I like the FLAVOR of the lore subclass being forced to take the intelligence based stuff, but not any of the rest of it. The cutting words feels disjointed from the "Lore" side of things. Bard features come at weird levels. Songs of restorations should probably just go away and the bard spell casting should just include Abjuration and Necromancy from the Primal Spell list.
Rogues need SOMETHING going into T2 of play to really make them stand out from the other experts.
Rangers have too much early not enough late game, and they lost a lot of flavor. I miss Land Strider. If hunter's mark wasn't a spell the need for first level spells at level 1 wouldn't be there and you could ease the Ranger into spell casting easier rather than having martial weapons, armor, expertise and spells all at level 1.
level 4 feats all being half feats makes it feel punishing to take a level 1 feat at level 4. By decoupling the +1 from the feats, some 4th level feats will fit better as first level feats and there will be less punishment for taking a lower level feat at 4th level.
I am satisfied with the rules glossary.
Compared to other classes (and the old rules), bard is way less useful until 7th level, and doesn't feel unique or interesting until 11th level (when most games have already ended). For a class that is basically designed to enable the rest of the party, this seems like a pretty big miss.
Rogue should be able to sneak attack once per-round with no other restrictions (resetting the ability at the start of their turn).
I have some other minor gripes, but those are the big ones.
I really have to agree with this. While it cuts down on space, there really is no purpose to unified lists if each class still has specific spells they can cast. It just becomes more of a pain in the hindparts for the players and DMs to separate it out.
Also, the thing Wizards needs to keep in mind is when designing and changing things, is to keep things simple enough but offer enough of an explanation for new players. Don't assume everyone knows what you (Wizards) is talking about.
Yeah the whole spell list this seems like an overreaction to a minor problem. Any time a new book like Tasha's comes out, they struggled to tell us who could use a new spell. They could make a chart, but then were afraid to mention them in a different book in case you didn't own that one. I think they really just wanted to be able to add new spells and say "This one is arcane, that one is divine" and not have to spell it out for each character.
But honestly, that only helps them at the expense of the player. I don't think anyone had a real problem with individual class spell lists. But trying to sort through them all every time you prepare a new day's spells is going to be a real pain without computer tools. Not to mention the fact that spells are having their schools changed strangely just to make them fit with the class they want.
Movement, allow people to mix movement type, jump shouldn't be an action, search/study should not be actions, hide change requirement to 1/2 cover/lightly obscured, add facing so people can sneak behind or up on people even out of cover/concealment.
I don't like the change to sneak attack as they were already behind on damage compared to other damage classes. There three suggestions I have for sneak attack.
1. Revert sneak attack to the way it was in 5e.
2. Increase sneak attack damage to d8 or d10 . This may bring them back line to the amount of damage that they originally dealt if they don't want them to sneak attack outside their turn and can't use blade cantrips like booming blade.
3. Change sneak attack to "once per round when you make an attack," this will make it so they can get a sneak attack on a ready action, AoO, or with blade cantrips. Also give them some type of battle maneuver specific to rogues that also adds a damage die to rogues on their attacks along with special maneuvers only available to specific subclasses.
Have to agree, keep write in's to short sentences nobody is gonna read a paragraph thesis on the change a single player would make.
So if your feedback is mid but you think it'd be good with your amazing change simply put it at dissatisfied and put "this feels bad to use" wotc isn't looking for ideas
Hm.... I don't care enough about known vs prepared spells to talk about that. Swapping out spells daily isn't something I'm big on.
Bard
Overall, I like the bard but for three things. The spell list needs fixing - either new list or DIET schools from any list, or something else. Not enough BI for all the stuff they want to do with it - need short rest and cannibalize spell slot option for more. Lore bard doesn't feel like its, well, got anything to do with Lore. Theme fail. A bit annoyed I can't take both bow and sword smite abilities with Magical Secrets at level 10 anymore, but if I'm going sword or bow bard, I guess I'll just use Magic Initiate and don't do mixed weapons on the same subclass.
Ranger
Its pretty good, I have no real complaints. I know some people claim its flavorless, but I don't have that issue. The only things I have an issue with is that Hunters Mark + TWFing is too strong, so Hunter's Mark needs to be nerfed a bit, and I'd love to see that Conjure Barrage rebalanced so its a good feature for Hunter. I'd also like to see the Hunter feature that lets me see Vulnerabilities, Immunities, etc also give me HP. No problem or cares about spells.
Rogue
Not much changed, imho. Some stuff got shuffled around, no biggie. The so-called sneak attack nerfs never really applied to my table, so it doesn't bother me - I will mention that I'd appreciate them switching it to once a round instead of only on their turn, though. I like getting another feat at 10, and I'm going to suggest even more feats everywhere for all four martials as balancing method with casters. Supreme Sneak is nice... if you're TWFing in melee. Archer rogues get nothing in return.
I'm more bothered by the lack of crossbows and Uncanny Dodge only reducing one attack - I like to see that kind of thing last a round, like the Shield spell does. Same feedback I will give for the Defensive Duelist feat. And speaking of feats...
Feats
Now then. Overall, I like the changes once again. No more Power Attack domination. I think that's good. I like breaking up the feats by level, but only stopping at 1, 4, 20 is half-assed. Lets see 1, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 feats.
Lightly armored is a bit too strong on its own. And, for all the people gripping about casters not wearing armor... I like that trope. Sorry.
I don't actually like Sharp Shooter getting to ignore people in melee with them. Shooting at enemies in melee? Yes, ignore that cover. But I want there to be a balance between crossbow master and sharpshooter, where one is good at close range and the other at long range, not both being able to do both with only a single feat. "Take this to remove all drawbacks and tactical considerations." Speaking of crossbow... I assume the ammo thing was a mistake and will be corrected.
Defensive Duelist should be all round, on par with Shield spell, not a single attack. Scales bad at higher levels. Dual Wielder should give that +1 Defense again. The whole point of that was to make it feel like your offhand weapon was a tiny pseudo-shield. Needs to stay for that reason alone.
Not a fan of Ritual Caster feat. Just feels off to me.
Level 20 feats.... honestly, most of them just feel BAD. They're literally called epic boons but feel... less than epic. Some of them are worse than things you get at level 1.
Spells
I've already said my bit about how I don't like Bard getting shoved into Arcane because they lose a lot of thematic options, but I don't mind the Ranger/Druid mix. The only issue with spell preparation is that I know more than a few people that have anxiety and avoid classes with spell prep. So, for their sake, there needs to be a bit of a middle ground. Spells known tend to get screwed over, and spells prepared causes issues with part of the D&D player base.
Actions / Index
Lots of people complaining about Jump, but... well, I have no problems with dangerous jumps. There's good arguments about making it a full action in the middle of combat being an issue, but I'd personally rather have the default be an action and Monks/Barbs getting the jump as a bonus action. I'm more concerned about both Acrobatics and Athletics being used to jump. Like... are we destroying all differences between the two completely?
If I could take a minute to build on this idea a little, I hope it helps to understand some of what might be going on behind the scenes. I have no idea what their team's process is for going through these surveys. But my daily work involves analyzing large piles of data, mostly written as long form feedback and records, so it is probably very similar to what they must be looking at.
First, the rating you give will be very important. It is the only piece of hard data they will get. This is how they will filter out what to focus their energy on. Any feature with mostly Satisfied or Very Satisfied responses will likely see no changes. They will set those aside as 'job well done' and turn their attention on the parts that people don't like. Likewise, as participants in the survey, we should focus on the things we really have a problem with.
Next, for the features with negative scores, someone will likely be tasked with categorizing the written responses. They will know which ones we don't like, but they need more data to know WHY we don't like it. Focus on explaining your problems with a feature over possible solutions. Again, I have no idea what process they will use, but example categories might be:
Overpowered - the feature is too strong
Underpowered - the feature is too weak
Flavor - the feature doesn't match the fantasy
Confusing - the rules aren't well explained
Loopholes - there are unforseen consequences the way it is written
Once they have these categories, they will then focus on the top 80% of complaints for each feature. Those are the ones that someone will actually read in depth. As others have said, they probably aren't looking for ideas. Feel free to give them briefly, they might even be inspired by one every now and then. But there is a character limit for a reason.
It's more important to make your first sentence your Problem Statement to help them categorize the negative feedback. For example - 'The rules for Hiding are too confusing," or "Sneak Attack damage feels weak without our old tricks." Then offer details on specific questions you have, if you want to.
Hope that helps.
Change the wording on Favored Enemy from "don't have to concentrate on hunter's Mark" to "you gain advantage on concentration checks when concentrating on hunters mark.
Being able to deal 6d6+mod at level 1 is more broken than being able to sneak attack on opportunity attack. This rates overpowered and loophole.
Or heck, you could even say they automatically succeed on all checks to concentrate on Hunter's Mark. This would mean they could keep it up, but at least could not concentrate on another spell (such as Hex) at the same time.Edit: sorry this was not the proper thread for me to make a response like this. I have instead responded on the Hunter's Mark thread now.
not sure where you're getting 6d6+mod at level 1, it'd be 4d6+mod at level 1 if you used two short swords, perhaps you confused that for level 5 when ranger gets extra attack. It is however a big problem with Ranger right now that they get all of their best features by level 5 and then nothing for damage until level 13, which is a feature that conflicts with hunter's mark for the bonus action, and then again not until 18 when you get 1d10 hunter's mark which basically is only adding around ~4.2 DPR; Meanwhile rogues can turn a missed attack into a critical hit or bards get to regains charges of their bardic inspiration every time initiative is rolled, even if there was no short rest or anything. Bardic inspiration scales with both Bard Level & Proficiency and a rogue's sneak attack adds a 1d6 every 2 levels. Which is the real issue with hunter's mark, it's a flat bonus and doesn't scale properly at all.
As far as the unified spell lists go I am completely fine with them. That said I do believe they need to write out each spell list for each class. I get that they are gearing up for a VTT and keeping DDB toolset so you can just filter by your class, but for any still doing it the old fashioned way, a written out list for each class would be nice.
I do find it helpful for things like the magic initiate feat, you just pick divine, primal, arcane, or for any spells, feats, magic items that they may add, that would have used a “pick from bard, cleric, Druid, sorcerer, wizard, warlock spell list” It broadens your options this way.
When Tasha’s came out and there were additional spell lists, like for the aberrant mind or Clockwork sorcerer, they only added PHB spells so people were only dependent on the core rule books. This would still be an issue going forward so it doesn’t help with that.
But seems like digital will be the default in how they approach the “book” design
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
That's how it is. If anyone wants to suggest design changes, feel free to do so. But it is a waste of time. WoTC already pays money to various people for that. What they want from us is that we tell them what we like and what we don't. In no way are they asking us to redesign the game, and they absolutely don't care about our design suggestions. Which is logical, on the other hand.
If you want to be effective and not waste your time, do what Yurei1453 suggests. And you will also be more useful for the testplay.