I don’t quite agree. They are pretty good cantrips but I don’t think they are that broken. If a wizard wants to gish, fine. They need a way to get armor and still only d6 HD. So they are not replacing a fighter, paladin, or ranger on the front lines. Classes with extra attack typically don’t use these cantrips. It does work out good for rogues, especially Arcane Trickster.
Edit: And really, a wizard that wants to gish starts losing effectiveness as a wizard, even Bladesingers, if they start ignoring their higher tier spells.
It depends a bit on player level, but currently in One D&D it is already super easy for a wizard (or other arcane caster) to replace a fighter, paladin, or ranger on the front lines: 1st level feat - Lightly Armoured (was that the name?) : light, medium armour + shield = AC 14+2+2 = 18 (or only 2 below a plate + shield build), add in the Shield spell and you've got on demand AC 23 and access to Absorb Elements which makes up for 30% lower HP. However, it's important to note that with the changes to two-weapon fighting and feats, the sword + board archetype is really suboptimal and most frontliners are going to be two-weapon fighting, or PAMing, so our Wizard will have the same baseline AC as most frontliners.
Sure, the wizard-gish won't do as much damage with their weapon as the fighter, paladin, or ranger most of the time. But they will do much more than a similar character that has to rely on non-weapon cantrips for damage, and still have full spellcasting. Combine this with the fact that higher level spells are much more restricted due to the change in spell preparation, I expect the blade cantrips to be the default melee-cantrips that every caster uses when they don't have an appropriate higher level spell available.
That is a good point. I had forgotten about the armor feat in the UA. With the spell restrictions they only have at most like 4 1st level spell slots for shield and absorb elements? Sure they can upcast them but that leaves less slots for other spells.
Using the “on hit” mechanic would be bad for the blade cantrips, now that its faults have been pointed out. If GFB and BB stay as they are now then I don’t think it will really be an issue going forward. But who knows when they will be introduced in 1D&D. They aren’t in the UA so it may be some time before we see them again.
Edit: should GFB and BB be changed to this mechanic if/when they are reintroduced to 1D&D?
That's an interesting question; they've already shown an intention to make some cantrips into reactions. I don't personally agree with that being done for guidance (it doesn't need to be made useful in combat, it's already an excellent cantrip out of combat), but that might make sense for blade ward or true strike to just become a reaction to take less damage, or add a bonus to a hit or whatever.
The tricky thing with booming blade and green-flame blade is that their current trade off (casting as an action for only a single attack) limits their potential abuse. If you could do it as a bonus action on top of multiple attacks then they'd become a no brainer on Eldritch Knights unless the effect was severely weakened, but if you weaken the effect it will make them a lot worse for the single attack characters they were kind of aimed at in the first place.
That said, those cantrips have always occupied a tricky space in terms of balance so it does seem likely they'll need to be redesigned to step on the toes of martial classes a bit less, not sure what the correct solution for that would be though.
TBH those cantrips are broken, they are entirely designed to allow spellcasters to play as martials so it isn't possible for them to not step on the toes of martials - that is exactly what they are designed to do! - either we give up and have the game be dominated by casters & gishes or those cantrips need to be removed entirely.
I don’t quite agree. They are pretty good cantrips but I don’t think they are that broken. If a wizard wants to gish, fine. They need a way to get armor and still only d6 HD. So they are not replacing a fighter, paladin, or ranger on the front lines. Classes with extra attack typically don’t use these cantrips. It does work out good for rogues, especially Arcane Trickster.
Edit: And really, a wizard that wants to gish starts losing effectiveness as a wizard, even Bladesingers, if they start ignoring their higher tier spells.
The point of the gish fighting isn't to ignore higher tier spells its to allow them to save them for when its clutch so they overall become much more powerful.
Though the rogue alone is reason enough to remove those cantrips imo. A rogues best sneak attack shouldn't have to come from using magic.
Whatever is optimal is about being the best at whatever you're trying to do, and raw damage output isn't always it.
TWF means three 1d6 weapons, until you can get the feat. Depending on your build, that could be accomplished with Strength or Dexterity. But the feat for it can only improve Dexterity, so the optimal path means being limited to (at most) 17 AC. A fighter or paladin could make good use of this with high Strength and medium armor, but this is more than likely for those more inclined to finesse weapons.
A character in heavier armor with the Dueling style, however, gets to balance their output with heavier armor and a shield. They also don't need a feat to use a bigger weapon, and, since every melee weapon automatically can use Strength, such characters naturally have more options. They could even take Shield Master, which gives them their own quasi-TWF and a reaction. That's nothing to sneeze at.
So, let's take a snapshot of what such 20th-level characters might look like.
TWF/DW: 17 AC with 4 attacks at 1d8+5 (averaging 38) plus 1 attack at 1d6.5 (averaging 8.5) for a total of 46.5. They're more likely to act faster and pass Dexterity saving throws with no investment.
Duelist/SM: 20 AC with 4 attacks at 1d8+7 (averaging 46 total) plus a free DC 19 Strength save to knock an enemy prone (for advantage on future melee attacks). They tend to act more slowly, but they have a reaction (if they pass certain Dexterity saving throws) to negate AoE damage.
With these two Fighters, I see two fairly even builds with some mutual tradeoffs.
Wizards, especially Bladesingers, have another problem in that they need to balance weapons with their arcane focus, or an empty hand in the event of something like absorb elements. Stowing a weapon and drawing a focus in one turn may not be possible, so they may want a focus they can use all the time, like a staff. But hitting with that means Strength, which means another ability score to worry about. They could get around that with something like gauntlets of ogre power or a ruby of the war mage, but neither of those are guaranteed. They'd almost certainly want War Caster, and that should probably be their 4th-level feat. Which means, by the time they could pick up Dual Wielder, they've already figured out a workable rotation. Dual Wielder might not even be a factor, so something like Defensive Duelist could be better for them. I certainly think it's more economical.
The weird thing about the playtest iteration of Dual Wielder is it merely requires proficiency with a martial weapon. It doesn't care if you don't use the proficiency for any of the attacks, or if it's even with a ranged weapon. It would be enough to just have longbow proficiency, which I don't agree with, and I hope that sees a revision.
Whatever is optimal is about being the best at whatever you're trying to do, and raw damage output isn't always it.
TWF means three 1d6 weapons, until you can get the feat. Depending on your build, that could be accomplished with Strength or Dexterity. But the feat for it can only improve Dexterity, so the optimal path means being limited to (at most) 17 AC. A fighter or paladin could make good use of this with high Strength and medium armor, but this is more than likely for those more inclined to finesse weapons.
A character in heavier armor with the Dueling style, however, gets to balance their output with heavier armor and a shield. They also don't need a feat to use a bigger weapon, and, since every melee weapon automatically can use Strength, such characters naturally have more options. They could even take Shield Master, which gives them their own quasi-TWF and a reaction. That's nothing to sneeze at.
So, let's take a snapshot of what such 20th-level characters might look like.
TWF/DW: 17 AC with 4 attacks at 1d8+5 (averaging 38) plus 1 attack at 1d6.5 (averaging 8.5) for a total of 46.5. They're more likely to act faster and pass Dexterity saving throws with no investment.
Duelist/SM: 20 AC with 4 attacks at 1d8+7 (averaging 46 total) plus a free DC 19 Strength save to knock an enemy prone (for advantage on future melee attacks). They tend to act more slowly, but they have a reaction (if they pass certain Dexterity saving throws) to negate AoE damage.
With these two Fighters, I see two fairly even builds with some mutual tradeoffs.
Wizards, especially Bladesingers, have another problem in that they need to balance weapons with their arcane focus, or an empty hand in the event of something like absorb elements. Stowing a weapon and drawing a focus in one turn may not be possible, so they may want a focus they can use all the time, like a staff. But hitting with that means Strength, which means another ability score to worry about. They could get around that with something like gauntlets of ogre power or a ruby of the war mage, but neither of those are guaranteed. They'd almost certainly want War Caster, and that should probably be their 4th-level feat. Which means, by the time they could pick up Dual Wielder, they've already figured out a workable rotation. Dual Wielder might not even be a factor, so something like Defensive Duelist could be better for them. I certainly think it's more economical.
The weird thing about the playtest iteration of Dual Wielder is it merely requires proficiency with a martial weapon. It doesn't care if you don't use the proficiency for any of the attacks, or if it's even with a ranged weapon. It would be enough to just have longbow proficiency, which I don't agree with, and I hope that sees a revision.
Looking at a character at level 20 is dumb b/c people hardly ever play at that level. We should be considering the character from level 3-10 as that is the vast majority of play the character is likely to actually see.
Sword & Board (level 1-4) : 1d8+STR+2 or 1d8+DEX+2 = 4.5+3 = 9.5 * tohit TWF (level 1-4) : 2d6+STR*2 or 2d6+DEX*2 = 7+3*2 = 13 * to hit = 37% higher DPR than S&B PAM (level 1-4) : NA PAM is not available as a 1st level feat
Sword & Board (level 5-10): 2* (1d8+STR+2 or 1d8+DEX+2) = 2*(4.5+6) = 21* tohit or 23*to hit (when STR/DEX = +5) TWF (level 5-10) : 3* (1d6+STR) or 3*(1d6+DEX) = 22.6 * tohit or 25.5 * to hit = 10% higher DPR than S&B PAM (level 5-10) : 2* (1d10+STR) + 1d4+STR = 25.5 * to hit or 28.5 * to hit = 20% higher DPR than S&B.
I said it was a snapshot. You don't have to call something that wasn't meant to be comprehensive dumb.
And okay, the people who don't have shields are dealing more damage than the people who do have shields. That's not shocking. The person with the shield is less-likely to be hit, and the person with PAM is using their bonus action. That's something DW and SM don't have to worry about. We should probably throw GWM into the mix, as well, but that requires three different calculations at levels 3-4, 5-8, and 9-10. Maybe we could get away with an average?
Arguing the exact % of difference in damage is a bit beside the point. The original topic was BB / GFB, and whether/how they should be included in One D&D. Salient Points: - it is relatively trivial for spellcasters to match or exceed the AC of other front liners -> Magic Initiate or Lightly Armoured are both 1st level feats making it trivial for any full spellcaster to get: shield proficiency, armour proficiency, and the Shield spell. - BB/GFB enable spellcasters to deal decent (though not optimal) damage in melee, without sacrificing any degree of spellcasting.
I’m sure somebody must have said this somewhere in this thread but it’s a bit long for me to look through. I just built a Druid using the new rules and they really need to fix this class up. First off I like the idea of the templates as a way of doing summoning, companions and shape changing but the Druid one for wild shape does not work as they’ve done it.
A basic build first level Druid most likely has a AC 15 HP 10 and attacks with their shillelagh with a +5 attack and 1d8+3 damage in humanoid form.
In wild shape they have a AC 13 HP 10 and attack with bestial strike with a +5 attack and 1d8+3 damage. The wild shape is worse than the humanoid form in combat. And combat is the most basic use of wild shape.
2nd level they get new channel nature tricks. I like them both.
3rd level they take on Circle of the Moon. This gives them healing spells in wild shape if healing spells continue to require no material components, this is nice, the shape shift as a bonus action, still useful. And an unarmed strike as a bonus action. That doesn’t make sense. The wild shape template doesn’t have unarmed strike as an attack option so I’m guessing that is a mistake and they mean a bonus action to make an additional bestial strike. Unless the Druid in human form will be moonlighting as a martial artist.
then 5th level they get multi attack in beast form.
Thing to me. Until they are at least third level wild shape isn’t even useful for the most basic of all uses, being in combat. Even after 3rd and 5th level it’s kind of squishy although I guess it makes up for that with flurries of furry attacks.
Since they are casters they don’t need to be better than the fighter in wild shape in combat but they should at least be better than themselves in wild shape.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think the bonus action unarmed strike is there to simulate the trip attack many beasts get.
Which honestly is poor design. The point of the templates was to avoid druid players having to have two or three different books open at the same time to play their character, but then then hide one of the core features of Moon Druid in a separate set of rules somewhere else in the books. They should just put "BA: Trip / Shove (Moon druid only)" in the statblock of the templates.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
Technically true but the ability is Combat Wild Shape, so I think it is obvious what the RAI is.
I think the bonus action unarmed strike is there to simulate the trip attack many beasts get.
Which honestly is poor design. The point of the templates was to avoid druid players having to have two or three different books open at the same time to play their character, but then then hide one of the core features of Moon Druid in a separate set of rules somewhere else in the books. They should just put "BA: Trip / Shove (Moon druid only)" in the statblock of the templates.
Not saying it is good design, I'm not opposed to templates in theory. But that is about where their okay design ended in the 1d&d wild shape rules, the execution of the templates is about as complete of a miss as you can have.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
It is literally under the Combat Wildshape feature. It is not a separate feature. But part of Combat Wildshape. I can see how you can read it that way, but if it wasn’t what you could do when wildshaped it would be under a different heading. Could definitely need better wording for clarification.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
It is literally under the Combat Wildshape feature. It is not a separate feature. But part of Combat Wildshape. I can see how you can read it that way, but if it wasn’t what you could do when wildshaped it would be under a different heading. Could definitely need better wording for clarification.
Yes, it is part of the Combat Wild Shape feature. Combat Wild Shape is the name of the feature it is in, and the feature it is in is named Combat Wild Shape. The thing is, the name of the feature is irrelevant regarding RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
It is literally under the Combat Wildshape feature. It is not a separate feature. But part of Combat Wildshape. I can see how you can read it that way, but if it wasn’t what you could do when wildshaped it would be under a different heading. Could definitely need better wording for clarification.
Yes, it is part of the Combat Wild Shape feature. Combat Wild Shape is the name of the feature it is in, and the feature it is in is named Combat Wild Shape. The thing is, the name of the feature is irrelevant regarding RAW.
Your argument would have merit IMO if you were saying hey I think they should reword this to be clear as the other features under it mention wild shape under them. But instead you are trying to argue during a playtest document that the probable RAI doesn't matter and going to go with a RAW instead for how it works. RAW in the final document may have some merit for a balance argument. But in a play test, it should just be used to nitpick the writing to make it clearer. And once clear make the balance argument. Or at the least say if the intent is to let you use it even in your normal form it would mean X, if only while wild shaped it means Y.
It is under combat wold shape, they have no issues with just giving you 2 separate level 3 abilities. Them grouping it under combat wild shape instead of a separate ability imo shows its intent. Sure we could be wrong and they actually intended this for any time not just when wild shaped which is why it should be clarified either as a separate ability or being clearer in the ability its only while wild shaped.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
It is literally under the Combat Wildshape feature. It is not a separate feature. But part of Combat Wildshape. I can see how you can read it that way, but if it wasn’t what you could do when wildshaped it would be under a different heading. Could definitely need better wording for clarification.
Yes, it is part of the Combat Wild Shape feature. Combat Wild Shape is the name of the feature it is in, and the feature it is in is named Combat Wild Shape. The thing is, the name of the feature is irrelevant regarding RAW.
Your argument would have merit IMO if you were saying hey I think they should reword this to be clear as the other features under it mention wild shape under them. But instead you are trying to argue during a playtest document that the probable RAI doesn't matter and going to go with a RAW instead for how it works. RAW in the final document may have some merit for a balance argument. But in a play test, it should just be used to nitpick the writing to make it clearer. And once clear make the balance argument. Or at the least say if the intent is to let you use it even in your normal form it would mean X, if only while wild shaped it means Y.
When did I say anything other than that? Something from the text you just quoted: "It's probably just an oversight in the writing."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That is a good point. I had forgotten about the armor feat in the UA. With the spell restrictions they only have at most like 4 1st level spell slots for shield and absorb elements? Sure they can upcast them but that leaves less slots for other spells.
Using the “on hit” mechanic would be bad for the blade cantrips, now that its faults have been pointed out. If GFB and BB stay as they are now then I don’t think it will really be an issue going forward. But who knows when they will be introduced in 1D&D. They aren’t in the UA so it may be some time before we see them again.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The point of the gish fighting isn't to ignore higher tier spells its to allow them to save them for when its clutch so they overall become much more powerful.
Though the rogue alone is reason enough to remove those cantrips imo. A rogues best sneak attack shouldn't have to come from using magic.
Whatever is optimal is about being the best at whatever you're trying to do, and raw damage output isn't always it.
TWF means three 1d6 weapons, until you can get the feat. Depending on your build, that could be accomplished with Strength or Dexterity. But the feat for it can only improve Dexterity, so the optimal path means being limited to (at most) 17 AC. A fighter or paladin could make good use of this with high Strength and medium armor, but this is more than likely for those more inclined to finesse weapons.
A character in heavier armor with the Dueling style, however, gets to balance their output with heavier armor and a shield. They also don't need a feat to use a bigger weapon, and, since every melee weapon automatically can use Strength, such characters naturally have more options. They could even take Shield Master, which gives them their own quasi-TWF and a reaction. That's nothing to sneeze at.
So, let's take a snapshot of what such 20th-level characters might look like.
With these two Fighters, I see two fairly even builds with some mutual tradeoffs.
Wizards, especially Bladesingers, have another problem in that they need to balance weapons with their arcane focus, or an empty hand in the event of something like absorb elements. Stowing a weapon and drawing a focus in one turn may not be possible, so they may want a focus they can use all the time, like a staff. But hitting with that means Strength, which means another ability score to worry about. They could get around that with something like gauntlets of ogre power or a ruby of the war mage, but neither of those are guaranteed. They'd almost certainly want War Caster, and that should probably be their 4th-level feat. Which means, by the time they could pick up Dual Wielder, they've already figured out a workable rotation. Dual Wielder might not even be a factor, so something like Defensive Duelist could be better for them. I certainly think it's more economical.
The weird thing about the playtest iteration of Dual Wielder is it merely requires proficiency with a martial weapon. It doesn't care if you don't use the proficiency for any of the attacks, or if it's even with a ranged weapon. It would be enough to just have longbow proficiency, which I don't agree with, and I hope that sees a revision.
Looking at a character at level 20 is dumb b/c people hardly ever play at that level. We should be considering the character from level 3-10 as that is the vast majority of play the character is likely to actually see.
Sword & Board (level 1-4) : 1d8+STR+2 or 1d8+DEX+2 = 4.5+3 = 9.5 * tohit
TWF (level 1-4) : 2d6+STR*2 or 2d6+DEX*2 = 7+3*2 = 13 * to hit = 37% higher DPR than S&B
PAM (level 1-4) : NA PAM is not available as a 1st level feat
Sword & Board (level 5-10): 2* (1d8+STR+2 or 1d8+DEX+2) = 2*(4.5+6) = 21* tohit or 23*to hit (when STR/DEX = +5)
TWF (level 5-10) : 3* (1d6+STR) or 3*(1d6+DEX) = 22.6 * tohit or 25.5 * to hit = 10% higher DPR than S&B
PAM (level 5-10) : 2* (1d10+STR) + 1d4+STR = 25.5 * to hit or 28.5 * to hit = 20% higher DPR than S&B.
I said it was a snapshot. You don't have to call something that wasn't meant to be comprehensive dumb.
And okay, the people who don't have shields are dealing more damage than the people who do have shields. That's not shocking. The person with the shield is less-likely to be hit, and the person with PAM is using their bonus action. That's something DW and SM don't have to worry about. We should probably throw GWM into the mix, as well, but that requires three different calculations at levels 3-4, 5-8, and 9-10. Maybe we could get away with an average?
Arguing the exact % of difference in damage is a bit beside the point. The original topic was BB / GFB, and whether/how they should be included in One D&D. Salient Points:
- it is relatively trivial for spellcasters to match or exceed the AC of other front liners -> Magic Initiate or Lightly Armoured are both 1st level feats making it trivial for any full spellcaster to get: shield proficiency, armour proficiency, and the Shield spell.
- BB/GFB enable spellcasters to deal decent (though not optimal) damage in melee, without sacrificing any degree of spellcasting.
I’m sure somebody must have said this somewhere in this thread but it’s a bit long for me to look through. I just built a Druid using the new rules and they really need to fix this class up. First off I like the idea of the templates as a way of doing summoning, companions and shape changing but the Druid one for wild shape does not work as they’ve done it.
A basic build first level Druid most likely has a AC 15 HP 10 and attacks with their shillelagh with a +5 attack and 1d8+3 damage in humanoid form.
In wild shape they have a AC 13 HP 10 and attack with bestial strike with a +5 attack and 1d8+3 damage. The wild shape is worse than the humanoid form in combat. And combat is the most basic use of wild shape.
2nd level they get new channel nature tricks. I like them both.
3rd level they take on Circle of the Moon. This gives them healing spells in wild shape if healing spells continue to require no material components, this is nice, the shape shift as a bonus action, still useful. And an unarmed strike as a bonus action. That doesn’t make sense. The wild shape template doesn’t have unarmed strike as an attack option so I’m guessing that is a mistake and they mean a bonus action to make an additional bestial strike. Unless the Druid in human form will be moonlighting as a martial artist.
then 5th level they get multi attack in beast form.
Thing to me. Until they are at least third level wild shape isn’t even useful for the most basic of all uses, being in combat. Even after 3rd and 5th level it’s kind of squishy although I guess it makes up for that with flurries of furry attacks.
Since they are casters they don’t need to be better than the fighter in wild shape in combat but they should at least be better than themselves in wild shape.
I think the bonus action unarmed strike is there to simulate the trip attack many beasts get.
Yeah, I’m looking at it now and it does make sense. Since the wild shaped Druid has a strength, constitution and dexterity equal to its wisdom the attack roll is the same and rather than damage it can be used to shove or grapple. So that’s good. And I hadn’t noticed the top bit of combat wild shape that says ‘while transformed’ so no flurry of blows in humanoid form.
of course the first and second level wild shaped Druid is still inferior to a Druid with a stick.
Quite the reverse on the Quick Attack, actually. The "while transformed" bit is just flavor text (if it weren't then you wouldn't be able to use Swift Transformation in any useful capacity), and you lose all class features while Wild Shaped, so you can only use the BA Unarmed Strike while humanoid. It's probably just an oversight in the writing, but still.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
@Quar1on, I was wondering about that too. I’m guessing they’ll rewrite that a bit.
I’m not sure what you mean. If you want to use wildshape to transform as a bonus action then you can’t unarmed strike as a BA on that turn. But subsequent turns while in Land, Sea, Air form you can BA unarmed strike. If you are in your humanoid form you cannot using these rules.
I must not be understanding what you meant. Sorry it’s early
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Look at the actual text of the feature. Nothing says that you can only use it while in Wild Shape, nor does anything say that you can use it while Wild Shaped at all. Class features do not carry over into Wild Shape unless they specifically say that they affect how Wild Shape works. Nothing in the feature says that you can't use it while humanoid, either. So you can't use it while Wild Shaped, but you can use it while humanoid.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Which honestly is poor design. The point of the templates was to avoid druid players having to have two or three different books open at the same time to play their character, but then then hide one of the core features of Moon Druid in a separate set of rules somewhere else in the books. They should just put "BA: Trip / Shove (Moon druid only)" in the statblock of the templates.
Technically true but the ability is Combat Wild Shape, so I think it is obvious what the RAI is.
Not saying it is good design, I'm not opposed to templates in theory. But that is about where their okay design ended in the 1d&d wild shape rules, the execution of the templates is about as complete of a miss as you can have.
It is literally under the Combat Wildshape feature. It is not a separate feature. But part of Combat Wildshape.
I can see how you can read it that way, but if it wasn’t what you could do when wildshaped it would be under a different heading. Could definitely need better wording for clarification.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yes, it is part of the Combat Wild Shape feature. Combat Wild Shape is the name of the feature it is in, and the feature it is in is named Combat Wild Shape. The thing is, the name of the feature is irrelevant regarding RAW.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Your argument would have merit IMO if you were saying hey I think they should reword this to be clear as the other features under it mention wild shape under them. But instead you are trying to argue during a playtest document that the probable RAI doesn't matter and going to go with a RAW instead for how it works. RAW in the final document may have some merit for a balance argument. But in a play test, it should just be used to nitpick the writing to make it clearer. And once clear make the balance argument. Or at the least say if the intent is to let you use it even in your normal form it would mean X, if only while wild shaped it means Y.
It is under combat wold shape, they have no issues with just giving you 2 separate level 3 abilities. Them grouping it under combat wild shape instead of a separate ability imo shows its intent. Sure we could be wrong and they actually intended this for any time not just when wild shaped which is why it should be clarified either as a separate ability or being clearer in the ability its only while wild shaped.
When did I say anything other than that? Something from the text you just quoted: "It's probably just an oversight in the writing."
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)