no one notice that Prayer of healing give u short rest effects in 10 minutes now? speed run short rest ? Fast food short rest?
Mandatory Spell.
Love all the Cleric changes it feels fun without even looking at the spells.
I'm not so sure about this change personally; I don't mind the idea of a spell that can trigger a faster short rest (I have catnap on my bard), but it feels a lot like a poor substitute to solving the real mechanical problem of groups/DMs that don't handle short rests well, or more specifically don't take as many as the game is intended to have.
Of course we don't know if they have anything planned to fix that somehow, like a DMG optional rule for playing without any short rests at all.
There are a couple of weird spell changes; they still seem determined to turn guidance into a reaction, but it's already a really good cantrip as an action requiring concentration, as a reaction (that's only spent on a failure) it will become another mandatory choice.
The changes to Aid and Barkskin also feel very similar like they're making them basically the same spell for some reason; do we really need three multi-target low temporary HP spells alongside heroism? I'd rather see something more interesting like barkskin also acting like camouflage so it'd be be a good ambush spell or something.
Aid and Barkskin are not available to the same classes so they aren't really competing with each other.
Doesn't anyone notice that the Prayer of healing gives u short rest of 10 minutes? Does speed run short rest? Fast food short rest?
Mandatory Spell.
I love all the Cleric changes. It feels fun without even looking at the spells.
It's especially good for a Thaumaturge Cleric who can use their channel divinity and then cast Prayer of Healing to get another use in just 10 mintues.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
I completely agree which is why I am so adamantly against the loss of the divinity part. What made them interesting to me was the divine egyptian/hindu gods esc feel. Having the beast movements + divine spells like guiding bolt and the new prayer of healing would be huge to have them stand out.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
I completely agree which is why I am so adamantly against the loss of the divinity part. What made them interesting to me was the divine egyptian/hindu gods esc feel. Having the beast movements + divine spells like guiding bolt and the new prayer of healing would be huge to have them stand out.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
I mean its possible, you'd have to be a expert and the stats to multiclass, have a good intelligence stat and a good wisdom stat all to be good at 2 mediocre skills. I'm sure there is a build that would like it, but I don't think it would bring much to the table past the role-playing. Fun sure but nothing big mechanically, I rolled a 30 on my arcana isnt going to come into play as much as heavy armor.
I'm of the opinion that if a skill like Arcana is mediocre in your games, you're either playing a low-magic game or are being way too liberal with how much information about magic you're giving to players.
I mean its possible, you'd have to be a expert and the stats to multiclass, have a good intelligence stat and a good wisdom stat all to be good at 2 mediocre skills. I'm sure there is a build that would like it, but I don't think it would bring much to the table past the role-playing. Fun sure but nothing big mechanically, I rolled a 30 on my arcana isnt going to come into play as much as heavy armor.
I'm of the opinion that if a skill like Arcana is mediocre in your games, you're either playing a low-magic game or are being way too liberal with how much information about magic you're giving to players.
Or not using nearly enough magical traps/devices that need arcane knowledge to deal with.
I mean its possible, you'd have to be a expert and the stats to multiclass, have a good intelligence stat and a good wisdom stat all to be good at 2 mediocre skills. I'm sure there is a build that would like it, but I don't think it would bring much to the table past the role-playing. Fun sure but nothing big mechanically, I rolled a 30 on my arcana isnt going to come into play as much as heavy armor.
I'm of the opinion that if a skill like Arcana is mediocre in your games, you're either playing a low-magic game or are being way too liberal with how much information about magic you're giving to players.
Or not using nearly enough magical traps/devices that need arcane knowledge to deal with.
glyph of warding is my favourite of these, and with how flexible it is in terms of what kind of trap it can spring on you thanks to its Spell Glyph mode, it's actually kinda puzzling to me that it isn't used more often.
I'll also add, though it's unrelated to how often Arcana is used, that the lack of magical traps is why dispel magic is considered "situational".
Ahh. Thank you. As a DM I ruled that didn’t apply to goodberries at all anyway, so for me it’s a null change as I’ll continue to rule it doesn’t apply to goodberries at all. The spell makes berries, it doesn’t heal anything. The berries may heal, the spell not so much. 🤷♂️
I think this is how most people ruled it, and there are hints in the language that this probably how it was always intended to work, but the new language is a lot less ambiguous which I think is a good change. They seem to be doing that with a lot of the changed rules as well, the rules for hiding and sight seem like they're going to be a lot clear, which should help with one of my biggest pet peeves with the 5e rules.
Aid and Barkskin are not available to the same classes so they aren't really competing with each other.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't be balanced against each other, plus there are ways to mix in spells from other lists if one has a better spell than you what you can normally take. But my main complaint really is that it's boring, if you're just going to have them be basically the same spell then why have two spells at all? Just pick one and add it to both lists. I'd much rather have spells that, even if they're still a bit similar, have some meaningful distinction.
Again, not saying they shouldn't both be temporary hit-points, but if one is going to be better in terms of the amount it gives, then the other should get an interesting rider effect so for those that do have access to both the choice is an interesting one, rather than a trivial one.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
I completely agree which is why I am so adamantly against the loss of the divinity part. What made them interesting to me was the divine egyptian/hindu gods esc feel. Having the beast movements + divine spells like guiding bolt and the new prayer of healing would be huge to have them stand out.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
I am hopeful we can still affect it by showing them they went too far in the other direction.
Divine Spark - Not the best option but it works well as a fallback for your channel divinity as healing/dealing damage will be useful most adventuring days. Less situational than Turn Undead at least.
Turn Undead - Now employs the "Dazed" condition, which is new condition in this document but not listed in the Rule Glossary's changelog. Officially this lets the turned Undead take either Move or take an Action on their turn, not both. (Also no bonus actions or reactions) However the only action allowed them is the Dash action which lets them Move...
Granted if that Undead had any bonus effects it could do when dashing then the choice might matter.
Holy Order - I like all of these. I especially like Thaumaturge even though it seems like the weakest option of the three. An extra cantrip doesn't mean much when the total number of Divine cantrips is 6. I feel like a way to spice this up would be to grant 1 cantrip from another spell list But it seems like the only way currently for a Cleric to restore Channel Divinity on a short rest.
Subclass at 3rd level is cool from a standardization level and I guess it cuts down on cheesy 1 level multiclass dips.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
I completely agree which is why I am so adamantly against the loss of the divinity part. What made them interesting to me was the divine egyptian/hindu gods esc feel. Having the beast movements + divine spells like guiding bolt and the new prayer of healing would be huge to have them stand out.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
That might be true for some people, even a lot possibly, but certainly not for me. I like broadening the idea of what a Celestial can look like. I hope it inspires more people to think about them outside of the standard box they are often put in.
In our playtest, our Aardling player patterned their character somewhat after Zhu Bajie from the Chinese story Journey to the West. The idea of playing a heavenly pig guy was appealing. He might not have had this idea if it weren't for the Aardling. So I'm happy that it has brought that to the table.
But... the problem was that the Aardling wasn't mechanically different enough from the Aasimar to make it clear where is stood. You could make an Aasimar with an animal head and have pretty much the same character. You can do that right now.
I personally like leaning into the animal aspect a little more to make them more distinct. I'm not sure they've found quite the right balance of beast and divine yet, but it's a step in a better direction for me. Ideally we would get a unique Aardling, AND show more intersting depictions of Aasimar to inspire people too.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
That's assuming backward compatibility is really a thing, which it looks to me like it quite clearly isn't. So at launch Ardling would be the only beast race available. I personally don't mind a bit more generic beast races (srsly who needed 3 different bird races and 2 different cat races???) but if that's what it is then that should be what it is, not this weird angel-beast hybrid mess. Honestly, the original Ardling that was full celestial was fine if they were cutting Aasimar and just changed the flavour text so you didn't have to have an animal head, or even just added some better lore than "something something yeah a celestial animal from the Beastlands f----- your grandma..."
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
That's assuming backward compatibility is really a thing, which it looks to me like it quite clearly isn't. So at launch Ardling would be the only beast race available. I personally don't mind a bit more generic beast races (srsly who needed 3 different bird races and 2 different cat races???) but if that's what it is then that should be what it is, not this weird angel-beast hybrid mess. Honestly, the original Ardling that was full celestial was fine if they were cutting Aasimar and just changed the flavour text so you didn't have to have an animal head, or even just added some better lore than "something something yeah a celestial animal from the Beastlands f----- your grandma..."
Have you seen anything that goes against their multiple time stated goal that you can use the old races? Because I sure as heck haven't. That said, ya going more beast is fine, but losing the divine is losing the entire point of the race.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
That's an interesting take, and honestly I was shocked how Judeo-Christian inspired D&D was when I first started considering how many of my friends who play are super into anime and manga. I'd honestly love a more Eastern-inspired D&D setting. But that isn't the current lore / dominant setting - Aasimar are descendants of Deva which exist in the Monster Manual and established lore that they come to the material plane and interact with humanoid races. The Ardling was just inventing a new humanoid species, but also some vague celestial beings that they supposedly descend from, and just leaving a giant plot hole for how a celestial wolf from the Beastlands ends up having a child with a human....
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
That's assuming backward compatibility is really a thing, which it looks to me like it quite clearly isn't. So at launch Ardling would be the only beast race available. I personally don't mind a bit more generic beast races (srsly who needed 3 different bird races and 2 different cat races???) but if that's what it is then that should be what it is, not this weird angel-beast hybrid mess. Honestly, the original Ardling that was full celestial was fine if they were cutting Aasimar and just changed the flavour text so you didn't have to have an animal head, or even just added some better lore than "something something yeah a celestial animal from the Beastlands f----- your grandma..."
I don't exactly disagree with the fact that backwards compatibility is questionable, but so far the MpMotM races are pretty similar in design to those presented in the UA.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
That's an interesting take, and honestly I was shocked how Judeo-Christian inspired D&D was when I first started considering how many of my friends who play are super into anime and manga. I'd honestly love a more Eastern-inspired D&D setting. But that isn't the current lore / dominant setting - Aasimar are descendants of Deva which exist in the Monster Manual and established lore that they come to the material plane and interact with humanoid races. The Ardling was just inventing a new humanoid species, but also some vague celestial beings that they supposedly descend from, and just leaving a giant plot hole for how a celestial wolf from the Beastlands ends up having a child with a human....
It is worth noting that it was never stated that any of these planetouched races have to be children or descendants of children of these otherworldly beings. That is just one possible source of them.
They can become the way they are by simply being present in or "touched" by the plane they're associated with, thus influencing their physiology. Or by being magically influenced by the being they're associated with, such as through pacts.
I am not against Ardling existing as more primal so long as Asimar are left to take on the divine aspects. Asi mar should reflect tiefling … as divine and infernal are opposite reflections.
Adding Ardling only gives you more options, no reason to fret about it. They already made it clear Asimar is staying, they just want to sell you a book so you can use it.
You want a Hindu God link to your PC? Half Breed Asimar and Ardling … take the Asimar racial features. Or Teifling / Ardling mix for an infernal version.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
That's assuming backward compatibility is really a thing, which it looks to me like it quite clearly isn't. So at launch Ardling would be the only beast race available. I personally don't mind a bit more generic beast races (srsly who needed 3 different bird races and 2 different cat races???) but if that's what it is then that should be what it is, not this weird angel-beast hybrid mess. Honestly, the original Ardling that was full celestial was fine if they were cutting Aasimar and just changed the flavour text so you didn't have to have an animal head, or even just added some better lore than "something something yeah a celestial animal from the Beastlands f----- your grandma..."
Have you seen anything that goes against their multiple time stated goal that you can use the old races? Because I sure as heck haven't. That said, ya going more beast is fine, but losing the divine is losing the entire point of the race.
MpMotM is pretty much a perfect match to the species presented in the UA. I have to start getting used to saying species.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Aid and Barkskin are not available to the same classes so they aren't really competing with each other.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
It's especially good for a Thaumaturge Cleric who can use their channel divinity and then cast Prayer of Healing to get another use in just 10 mintues.
I figured out what is missing for me with ardling. If they still had the 1st and second level spell thing available I think I would love the new ardling.
Elfs were the primal caster race, tieflings were the arcne (mostly) it would be nice for ardling to be the divine. Even if it is super generic divine.
I am not personally for or against Ardlings, but I think they are just not interesting enough to appeal to a lot of players. There are already far more interesting Beastfolk to pick from so having a generic option is kind of meh to me.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
I completely agree which is why I am so adamantly against the loss of the divinity part. What made them interesting to me was the divine egyptian/hindu gods esc feel. Having the beast movements + divine spells like guiding bolt and the new prayer of healing would be huge to have them stand out.
That's what made them interesting to me too. At least conceptually.
I think ultimately the Ardling has proved one thing to me, and that's people are married quite heavily to the Judeo-Christian interpretation of celestials and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
I'm of the opinion that if a skill like Arcana is mediocre in your games, you're either playing a low-magic game or are being way too liberal with how much information about magic you're giving to players.
Or not using nearly enough magical traps/devices that need arcane knowledge to deal with.
glyph of warding is my favourite of these, and with how flexible it is in terms of what kind of trap it can spring on you thanks to its Spell Glyph mode, it's actually kinda puzzling to me that it isn't used more often.
I'll also add, though it's unrelated to how often Arcana is used, that the lack of magical traps is why dispel magic is considered "situational".
I think this is how most people ruled it, and there are hints in the language that this probably how it was always intended to work, but the new language is a lot less ambiguous which I think is a good change. They seem to be doing that with a lot of the changed rules as well, the rules for hiding and sight seem like they're going to be a lot clear, which should help with one of my biggest pet peeves with the 5e rules.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't be balanced against each other, plus there are ways to mix in spells from other lists if one has a better spell than you what you can normally take. But my main complaint really is that it's boring, if you're just going to have them be basically the same spell then why have two spells at all? Just pick one and add it to both lists. I'd much rather have spells that, even if they're still a bit similar, have some meaningful distinction.
Again, not saying they shouldn't both be temporary hit-points, but if one is going to be better in terms of the amount it gives, then the other should get an interesting rider effect so for those that do have access to both the choice is an interesting one, rather than a trivial one.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I am hopeful we can still affect it by showing them they went too far in the other direction.
Thoughts on Cleric:
Divine Spark - Not the best option but it works well as a fallback for your channel divinity as healing/dealing damage will be useful most adventuring days. Less situational than Turn Undead at least.
Turn Undead - Now employs the "Dazed" condition, which is new condition in this document but not listed in the Rule Glossary's changelog. Officially this lets the turned Undead take either Move or take an Action on their turn, not both. (Also no bonus actions or reactions) However the only action allowed them is the Dash action which lets them Move...
Granted if that Undead had any bonus effects it could do when dashing then the choice might matter.
Holy Order - I like all of these. I especially like Thaumaturge even though it seems like the weakest option of the three. An extra cantrip doesn't mean much when the total number of Divine cantrips is 6. I feel like a way to spice this up would be to grant 1 cantrip from another spell list
But it seems like the only way currently for a Cleric to restore Channel Divinity on a short rest.
Subclass at 3rd level is cool from a standardization level and I guess it cuts down on cheesy 1 level multiclass dips.
That might be true for some people, even a lot possibly, but certainly not for me. I like broadening the idea of what a Celestial can look like. I hope it inspires more people to think about them outside of the standard box they are often put in.
In our playtest, our Aardling player patterned their character somewhat after Zhu Bajie from the Chinese story Journey to the West. The idea of playing a heavenly pig guy was appealing. He might not have had this idea if it weren't for the Aardling. So I'm happy that it has brought that to the table.
But... the problem was that the Aardling wasn't mechanically different enough from the Aasimar to make it clear where is stood. You could make an Aasimar with an animal head and have pretty much the same character. You can do that right now.
I personally like leaning into the animal aspect a little more to make them more distinct. I'm not sure they've found quite the right balance of beast and divine yet, but it's a step in a better direction for me. Ideally we would get a unique Aardling, AND show more intersting depictions of Aasimar to inspire people too.
That's assuming backward compatibility is really a thing, which it looks to me like it quite clearly isn't. So at launch Ardling would be the only beast race available. I personally don't mind a bit more generic beast races (srsly who needed 3 different bird races and 2 different cat races???) but if that's what it is then that should be what it is, not this weird angel-beast hybrid mess. Honestly, the original Ardling that was full celestial was fine if they were cutting Aasimar and just changed the flavour text so you didn't have to have an animal head, or even just added some better lore than "something something yeah a celestial animal from the Beastlands f----- your grandma..."
Have you seen anything that goes against their multiple time stated goal that you can use the old races? Because I sure as heck haven't. That said, ya going more beast is fine, but losing the divine is losing the entire point of the race.
That's an interesting take, and honestly I was shocked how Judeo-Christian inspired D&D was when I first started considering how many of my friends who play are super into anime and manga. I'd honestly love a more Eastern-inspired D&D setting. But that isn't the current lore / dominant setting - Aasimar are descendants of Deva which exist in the Monster Manual and established lore that they come to the material plane and interact with humanoid races. The Ardling was just inventing a new humanoid species, but also some vague celestial beings that they supposedly descend from, and just leaving a giant plot hole for how a celestial wolf from the Beastlands ends up having a child with a human....
I don't exactly disagree with the fact that backwards compatibility is questionable, but so far the MpMotM races are pretty similar in design to those presented in the UA.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
It is worth noting that it was never stated that any of these planetouched races have to be children or descendants of children of these otherworldly beings. That is just one possible source of them.
They can become the way they are by simply being present in or "touched" by the plane they're associated with, thus influencing their physiology. Or by being magically influenced by the being they're associated with, such as through pacts.
I am not against Ardling existing as more primal so long as Asimar are left to take on the divine aspects. Asi mar should reflect tiefling … as divine and infernal are opposite reflections.
Adding Ardling only gives you more options, no reason to fret about it. They already made it clear Asimar is staying, they just want to sell you a book so you can use it.
You want a Hindu God link to your PC? Half Breed Asimar and Ardling … take the Asimar racial features. Or Teifling / Ardling mix for an infernal version.
MpMotM is pretty much a perfect match to the species presented in the UA. I have to start getting used to saying species.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master