I’ve had situations where Cutting Words’ damage reduction was in he best choice. 🤷♂️ It avoided riders that depended on damage taken when the attack bonus was too high or it was a saving throw.
Didn’t say there aren’t any times when Damage reduction would be better, just there are more situation were the new bardic inspiration healing is better. And if the bardic inspiration healing survives playtest the damage reduction is redundant since they are both reactions that expend bardic inspiration dice. If the healing gets cut then you might see the damage reduction return.
I’ve had situations where Cutting Words’ damage reduction was in he best choice. 🤷♂️ It avoided riders that depended on damage taken when the attack bonus was too high or it was a saving throw.
Didn’t say there aren’t any times when Damage reduction would be better, just there are more situation were the new bardic inspiration healing is better. And if the bardic inspiration healing survives playtest the damage reduction is redundant since they are both reactions that expend bardic inspiration dice. If the healing gets cut then you might see the damage reduction return.
My point is they are not redundant. Options win battles.
When the next UA and survey comes out, and I have 20 sets of radio buttons to tell WotC my satisfaction for each Paladin class feature, you think they're going to read and incorporate feedback from a text description of how this makes the bard feel?
Again, how would a sidebar help with this? Also, that is just how companies work; if you got thousands upon thousands of thousands of people giving you written feedback, do you think you'll be able to read, sort through, and use all of that? Do you seriously think that WotC will use one persons feedback and "incorporate" what that one person out of the 50 million D&D players in the world thought? You are holding WotC to impossible standards, don't be surprised when they can't meet them.
Don't take this the wrong way, but that's absurd. And so is this insistence that we can't have more information. Or that somehow having more information will lead to worse feedback.
It's not absurd, it's how companies work. And I keep having to say this, but no company is going to give you information about how things that haven't been released yet work, because that would spoil the things they aren't allowed to reveal and make people less excited to look at and review the new UA's if they've already been told "more information" in advance about them.
If you're talking about more information on current UA's and why the things in them work the way they work, then again, the videos help explain that.
Unless you work there or have some insider knowledge, there's no need to get defensive on behalf of a company whose motivations are just as opaque to you as they are to me.
Wait, so I can't defend WotC or agree and understand something they did because I don't work there? Just because I don't work at WotC doesn't mean I can't understand anything about how their business, and businesses in general, work. Anyways, I'm tired of having to repeat the same things to you over and over again.
Rogue feels a little behind the other experts at 5,6 and 9 when expertise is equalized and all they have is cunning action on the half and full caster.
Rogue feels a little behind the other experts at 5,6 and 9 when expertise is equalized and all they have is cunning action on the half and full caster.
This is definitely true in my experience too. I know a lot of people are already filled out the survey, but I'm slow and still playtesting.
In our party of a Bard, a Ranger, a multiclass Ranger/Rogue, and a Rogue, the single class rogue really feels like the weakest link by far. They have only succeeded at a single sneak attack. Any attempt to hide has failed. And due to some lackluster rolls, using allies hasn't been much more successful. That extra 1d6 after all that work sure felt pretty sad compared to the ranger's constant bonus, and the fact that everyone else can cast spells.
I don't know what the fix is. I really don't want rogues to have spells too, but they sure need something. I suspect if the hiding rules weren't so awful now, it would be a little better, but still not enough. Most of a rogue's unique abilities, while thematic, are really just used to either set up a sneak attack, or avoid damage.
Rogue feels a little behind the other experts at 5,6 and 9 when expertise is equalized and all they have is cunning action on the half and full caster.
This is definitely true in my experience too. I know a lot of people are already filled out the survey, but I'm slow and still playtesting.
In our party of a Bard, a Ranger, a multiclass Ranger/Rogue, and a Rogue, the single class rogue really feels like the weakest link by far. They have only succeeded at a single sneak attack. Any attempt to hide has failed. And due to some lackluster rolls, using allies hasn't been much more successful. That extra 1d6 after all that work sure felt pretty sad compared to the ranger's constant bonus, and the fact that everyone else can cast spells.
I don't know what the fix is. I really don't want rogues to have spells too, but they sure need something. I suspect if the hiding rules weren't so awful now, it would be a little better, but still not enough. Most of a rogue's unique abilities, while thematic, are really just used to either set up a sneak attack, or avoid damage.
Rogue feels a little behind the other experts at 5,6 and 9 when expertise is equalized and all they have is cunning action on the half and full caster.
This is definitely true in my experience too. I know a lot of people are already filled out the survey, but I'm slow and still playtesting.
In our party of a Bard, a Ranger, a multiclass Ranger/Rogue, and a Rogue, the single class rogue really feels like the weakest link by far. They have only succeeded at a single sneak attack. Any attempt to hide has failed. And due to some lackluster rolls, using allies hasn't been much more successful. That extra 1d6 after all that work sure felt pretty sad compared to the ranger's constant bonus, and the fact that everyone else can cast spells.
I don't know what the fix is. I really don't want rogues to have spells too, but they sure need something. I suspect if the hiding rules weren't so awful now, it would be a little better, but still not enough. Most of a rogue's unique abilities, while thematic, are really just used to either set up a sneak attack, or avoid damage.
My solution right now is put the level 10 feat down to level 6 like the fighter. It is why 10 feels good. 11+ feels great because reliable talent.
I really dislike how they made ability check contests seemingly disappear from the game, replacing them with boring, un-fun, un"realistic" static DCs. Would prefer if they kept at least 3 ability check contests, adapting NPC/monster stat blocks for proper balance using these.
1) Athletics vs Athletics or Acrobatics to initiate grapples or shoves. Vs AC just doesn't feel right, since high DEX / Acrobatic based character are penalized compared to heavily armored creatures. 2) Perception vs Stealth and vice versa. If passive Scores are no longer part of the game, keep at least a dynamic Perception check vs Stealth check result to hide. More narratively interesting. 3) Deception vs Insight. Also more narratively interesting, and High Wisdom, Insight-skilled NPCs should have a better chance at noticing Deception than a default DC 15.
Keeping contests as part of the rule also goes a long way for backward compatibility.
These are the three contests I would (will) certainly keep in the game.
I don't like Bards as a Prepared spellcaster, I don't like how they can only prepare spells from specific schools as opposed to having their own spell list. Bardic Inspiration has too few uses at lower levels. I don't like that Jack of all Trades comes so late in level. I don’t like that the Multiclassing rules are reprinted for every class, it’s a waste of space. I absolutely HATE the suggested prepared spells, I find it insulting.
I love the 5e Bard, it's one of my favorite classes. This 1DD Bard sucks ass. The only thing I think is good is adding in a 4th subclass feature.
College of Lore
I don't like that the Bonus Proficiencies are restricted to three specific skills. I don't like that Cutting Words can no longer be used on damage rolls. I don't like the loss of Additional Magical Secrets.
Rogue
I wish Evasion came sooner, but I understand why you moved it. I love that you have adjusted the subclass levels so Rogues get a second subclass feature earlier than 9th level.
Thief
I don’t like the Jump action so I don’t like that part of Second Story work. I don’t like losing the speed restriction on Supreme Sneak because it doesn’t feel right. I don’t like the change to Use Magic Devices, before it did away with the class restrictions against certain magic items, bring that back.
Feats
I don’t like the Jump action, so I don’t like the parts of any feat that interact with it. I don’t like that Sharpshooter and Spell Sniper ignore Half & Three Quarters Cover, I wish it ignored Half Cover and treated Three Quarters cover as only Half Cover.
Spell List
I don’t like how you are handling the spell lists and only allowing access to certain schools to certain classes.
Rules
I HATE the Jump action. I HATE Grappling as part of an Unarmed Strike. I HATE the nerf to combining special speeds. I don’t like the fixed DCs on the Influence action. I don’t like the changes to the Hide action, I preferred the opposed checks. I wish a Long Rest only restored half your HP. Just give it up with Inspiration already, nobody uses it. Get rid of Inspiration.
Guidance
Kill it. Kill it with fire. Just make it a 1st-level spell, or give it a 1 minute casting time.
Inspiration
Just get rid of Inspiration. Nobody likes it, nobody uses it. Are youse all being paid off by the Inspiration lobbyists or something?!?
I agree with most of your feedback here. Except I don't mind that much limiting spell class lists to certain schools, if that means the sorcerer and wizards feel more unique because of a broader access. Earlier editions did restrict schools, even for mages of a particular school. They should print the complete class spell list as part of each spellcasting class. Annoying to have to double check what schools, what spells, etc. when deciding which spells you want to have. If they want to suggest spells, just put a (*) beside each recommended spell in the list.
But agree: 1) "Known" spellcasters were fine; even easier for beginners. Put a sidebar that says DMs should be lenient in allowing spell change if player unsatisfied with a known choice. But Warlock or Sorcerers as Prepared spellcasters. Hope not! 2) College of Lore: missing the "lore" aspect in subclass features ; 3) Don't like the Jump action either, at least as currently written. Should be part of Cunning Action if they keep it as an action for rogues or rogue thieves... (Speaking of thieves, their Story Work feature steps on the toes of the Athlete feat and vice versa. I would love my thief to pick up Athlete for Hop Up, but rest of the feat I would already get, so not very appealing.) 4) I also hate grappling as part of Unarmed Strike, especially vs AC rather than Opposed ability check. Don't like the nerf to combining speed too. Don't like the fixed DCs. Don't like the change to Hide action (bring back contests!). Don't like the full HD restore on long rest. 5) I also hate Guidance as a ranged reaction. The problem was the way the spell was used by name players/DMs, not the spell itself. But if you have to nerf it, 1 minute casting time Touch-range guidance is actually a great idea. 6) Way too much Inspiration granted with natural 1s (playtested it with our group). There should be a hard limit of 1 or 2 per long rest. (I also think Inspiration is a lackluster game mechanic as there are already so many abilities/features/spells in the game that grant advantage)...
Yeah I'm really not liking straight DCs taking the place of contested rolls. In every situation I've tested so far, it causes strange results that don't feel good at all. I never had an issue with contested rolls. I don't even know what complaints they had that would make them want to change it. If it is a monster stat balance issue, they are reprinted those anyways, just give them some skills in Perception, Athletics, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Didn’t say there aren’t any times when Damage reduction would be better, just there are more situation were the new bardic inspiration healing is better. And if the bardic inspiration healing survives playtest the damage reduction is redundant since they are both reactions that expend bardic inspiration dice. If the healing gets cut then you might see the damage reduction return.
My point is they are not redundant. Options win battles.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Again, how would a sidebar help with this? Also, that is just how companies work; if you got thousands upon thousands of thousands of people giving you written feedback, do you think you'll be able to read, sort through, and use all of that? Do you seriously think that WotC will use one persons feedback and "incorporate" what that one person out of the 50 million D&D players in the world thought? You are holding WotC to impossible standards, don't be surprised when they can't meet them.
It's not absurd, it's how companies work. And I keep having to say this, but no company is going to give you information about how things that haven't been released yet work, because that would spoil the things they aren't allowed to reveal and make people less excited to look at and review the new UA's if they've already been told "more information" in advance about them.
If you're talking about more information on current UA's and why the things in them work the way they work, then again, the videos help explain that.
Wait, so I can't defend WotC or agree and understand something they did because I don't work there? Just because I don't work at WotC doesn't mean I can't understand anything about how their business, and businesses in general, work. Anyways, I'm tired of having to repeat the same things to you over and over again.
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.Rogue feels a little behind the other experts at 5,6 and 9 when expertise is equalized and all they have is cunning action on the half and full caster.
This is definitely true in my experience too. I know a lot of people are already filled out the survey, but I'm slow and still playtesting.
In our party of a Bard, a Ranger, a multiclass Ranger/Rogue, and a Rogue, the single class rogue really feels like the weakest link by far. They have only succeeded at a single sneak attack. Any attempt to hide has failed. And due to some lackluster rolls, using allies hasn't been much more successful. That extra 1d6 after all that work sure felt pretty sad compared to the ranger's constant bonus, and the fact that everyone else can cast spells.
I don't know what the fix is. I really don't want rogues to have spells too, but they sure need something. I suspect if the hiding rules weren't so awful now, it would be a little better, but still not enough. Most of a rogue's unique abilities, while thematic, are really just used to either set up a sneak attack, or avoid damage.
My solution right now is put the level 10 feat down to level 6 like the fighter. It is why 10 feels good. 11+ feels great because reliable talent.
I really dislike how they made ability check contests seemingly disappear from the game, replacing them with boring, un-fun, un"realistic" static DCs. Would prefer if they kept at least 3 ability check contests, adapting NPC/monster stat blocks for proper balance using these.
1) Athletics vs Athletics or Acrobatics to initiate grapples or shoves. Vs AC just doesn't feel right, since high DEX / Acrobatic based character are penalized compared to heavily armored creatures.
2) Perception vs Stealth and vice versa. If passive Scores are no longer part of the game, keep at least a dynamic Perception check vs Stealth check result to hide. More narratively interesting.
3) Deception vs Insight. Also more narratively interesting, and High Wisdom, Insight-skilled NPCs should have a better chance at noticing Deception than a default DC 15.
Keeping contests as part of the rule also goes a long way for backward compatibility.
These are the three contests I would (will) certainly keep in the game.
My Homebrew: Magic Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | My house rules
Currently playing: Fai'zal - CN Githyanki Rogue (Candlekeep Mysteries, Forgotten Realms) ; Zeena - LN Elf Sorcerer (Dragonlance)
Playing D&D since 1st edition. DMs Guild Author: B.A. Morrier (4-5⭐products! Please check them out.) Twitter: @benmorrier he/him
I agree with most of your feedback here. Except I don't mind that much limiting spell class lists to certain schools, if that means the sorcerer and wizards feel more unique because of a broader access. Earlier editions did restrict schools, even for mages of a particular school. They should print the complete class spell list as part of each spellcasting class. Annoying to have to double check what schools, what spells, etc. when deciding which spells you want to have. If they want to suggest spells, just put a (*) beside each recommended spell in the list.
But agree: 1) "Known" spellcasters were fine; even easier for beginners. Put a sidebar that says DMs should be lenient in allowing spell change if player unsatisfied with a known choice. But Warlock or Sorcerers as Prepared spellcasters. Hope not! 2) College of Lore: missing the "lore" aspect in subclass features ; 3) Don't like the Jump action either, at least as currently written. Should be part of Cunning Action if they keep it as an action for rogues or rogue thieves... (Speaking of thieves, their Story Work feature steps on the toes of the Athlete feat and vice versa. I would love my thief to pick up Athlete for Hop Up, but rest of the feat I would already get, so not very appealing.) 4) I also hate grappling as part of Unarmed Strike, especially vs AC rather than Opposed ability check. Don't like the nerf to combining speed too. Don't like the fixed DCs. Don't like the change to Hide action (bring back contests!). Don't like the full HD restore on long rest. 5) I also hate Guidance as a ranged reaction. The problem was the way the spell was used by name players/DMs, not the spell itself. But if you have to nerf it, 1 minute casting time Touch-range guidance is actually a great idea. 6) Way too much Inspiration granted with natural 1s (playtested it with our group). There should be a hard limit of 1 or 2 per long rest. (I also think Inspiration is a lackluster game mechanic as there are already so many abilities/features/spells in the game that grant advantage)...
My Homebrew: Magic Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | My house rules
Currently playing: Fai'zal - CN Githyanki Rogue (Candlekeep Mysteries, Forgotten Realms) ; Zeena - LN Elf Sorcerer (Dragonlance)
Playing D&D since 1st edition. DMs Guild Author: B.A. Morrier (4-5⭐products! Please check them out.) Twitter: @benmorrier he/him
Yeah I'm really not liking straight DCs taking the place of contested rolls. In every situation I've tested so far, it causes strange results that don't feel good at all. I never had an issue with contested rolls. I don't even know what complaints they had that would make them want to change it. If it is a monster stat balance issue, they are reprinted those anyways, just give them some skills in Perception, Athletics, etc.