I don't think you do lose skills known. You keep languages known. You keep mental scores. Nothing is there to comment about tool or skill proficiency. Just tool usability is determined by form.
It'd be one thing if it said you lose skills proficiency, but it doesn't. It doesn't speak of saving throws either. It really doesn't make sense that a druid would suddenly lose Nature or Wisdom saving throws proficiency, would it?
I'm reading this as not making your character sheet disappear and replacing it wholesale, but changing certain parts of the sheet.
The text from the UA is:
UA Wildshape: While in a form, its game statistics replace yours, and your ability to handle objects is determined by the form’s limbs, rather than your own. You retain your personality, memories, ability to speak, and Wild Shape. You lose access to all your other features,
Saving throw proficiencies, skill, weapon, and armour proficiencies are all features of your class which this explicitly says you lose. This text is almost the same as what is used in Polymorph:
5e Polymorph: The target's game statistics, including mental ability scores, are replaced by the statistics of the chosen beast. It retains its alignment and personality.
Anything not explicitly mentioned as something you keep is implied to be lost and replaced by those of the new statblock.
In UA Wildshape you have no skill proficiencies, no saving throw proficiencies, no weapon / armor proficiencies, no feats, no class features, no racial / background features except for the ability to Wildshape again / revert or using your beastial strikes.
Everybody is talking about Druid, but nobody is talking about how cool the new Epic Boons are. They really feel epic, like things that you won't be able to get anywhere else. No other feature in the game is ever going to let you have a 25% chance to just not expend a spell slot.
I don't think that was that big of a change. It is an improvement but nothing earthshaking and not enough. And I've already talked about how I am not a fan of the 20th level epic thing to death. And the +1 to a stat thing up to 30while I dig, I think if they are going this route they need to be explicit that you get a epic boon every x XP, so far unless I missed it(which I easily could have) it looks like a one and done at 20th.
Everybody is talking about Druid, but nobody is talking about how cool the new Epic Boons are. They really feel epic, like things that you won't be able to get anywhere else. No other feature in the game is ever going to let you have a 25% chance to just not expend a spell slot.
I don't think that was that big of a change. It is an improvement but nothing earthshaking and not enough. And I've already talked about how I am not a fan of the 20th level epic thing to death. And the +1 to a stat thing up to 30while I dig, I think if they are going this route they need to be explicit that you get a epic boon every x XP, so far unless I missed it(which I easily could have) it looks like a one and done at 20th.
You missed it. The document recommends giving an Epic Boon every 30,000 xp above 355,000.
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)
Reducing smites to once per round may necessary to reduce power creep, I don't know yet. Expanding smites to include unarmed strikes and ranged weapons is not the right answer. Paladins are melee fighter. They shouldn’t be better "smite infused" ranged archers than rangers though, or better or better "smite fueled" grapplers than barbarians. You make all the classes worse by making them more vanilla. They’re trying to discourage multi-classing. Leave the flavor in the class. Lean into it. Embrace it. The races/species are levelling enough.
Paladins will soon fall behind in their marshal abilities once WotC releases the Warrior class capabilities. They are meant to be different. So smites should be better, but not at the expense of the flavor of the other classes. Eliminate the concentration on the spell smites so the paladin can lean more into the divine side and maintain concentration on other spells. Otherwise, if you want a clearer differentiation between paladin and cleric, boost their martial capabilities in concert with the warrior class abilities once released.
I replied to this idea in the other paladin thread but suffice it to say I disagree. Unless it is unbalanced abilities should be broad and capable to be used in a wide range of ways so you can use the paladin class or any class to build a wide variety of mechanically and thematically distinct characters. Putting everything in a small box to avoid stepping on toes is not the way.
I understand the concept like how they probably pushed tiny creatures to level 11 in wild shape so a rogue could shine in stealth. I think the better option is to make the rogue so amazing at stealth if they focus on it a druid changing into a rat is still amateur hour. Some things I think are unbalanced, like imo find familiar, its too cheap of a low to no risk scouting technique. At least if the druid turned into the rat to sneak in they have skin in the game. A paladin smiting with a arrow does not seem unbalanced to me, they are blowing a spell to do a little bit more damage.
Everybody is talking about Druid, but nobody is talking about how cool the new Epic Boons are. They really feel epic, like things that you won't be able to get anywhere else. No other feature in the game is ever going to let you have a 25% chance to just not expend a spell slot.
I don't think that was that big of a change. It is an improvement but nothing earthshaking and not enough. And I've already talked about how I am not a fan of the 20th level epic thing to death. And the +1 to a stat thing up to 30while I dig, I think if they are going this route they need to be explicit that you get a epic boon every x XP, so far unless I missed it(which I easily could have) it looks like a one and done at 20th.
You missed it. The document recommends giving an Epic Boon every 30,000 xp above 355,000.
Thanks, I still would prefer it be separate from the 20oth level thing. 20th level in your class, should be something amazing around your class not something cool that is kind of generic or themed to any warrior type.
I think I do agree that Epic Boons still feel like they could be better... I feel like they're afraid to make them too amazing, for whatever reason. Although to be fair, a lot of 20th level features were pretty dull in the first place. Oh, I get 4 sorcery points when I complete a short rest? Well la-dee-da, I guess I'm unstoppable now. I can spend one minute to get my Warlock slots back? Oh good, a worse version of Catnap, a 3rd level spell that the other classes can get as early as 5th level.
I think I do agree that Epic Boons still feel like they could be better... I feel like they're afraid to make them too amazing, for whatever reason. Although to be fair, a lot of 20th level features were pretty dull in the first place. Oh, I get 4 sorcery points when I complete a short rest? Well la-dee-da, I guess I'm unstoppable now. I can spend one minute to get my Warlock slots back? Oh good, a worse version of Catnap, a 3rd level spell that the other classes can get as early as 5th level.
Agreed that many were lame, but they should have fixed them, as right now they just shifted the lame to 18th level. I'd of rolled with balancing them around the 20th level barbarian ability. My main issue is it doesn't seem like a peak of your class ability as any character or anyone from your group can take it. Have the first epic boon locked or from a small list of 3 that are specific to your class. Put effort in to make it really fit the idea of a exemplar of fighter/rogue etc.
Re-reading through the various 20th level features... honestly, I think Paladins have the best one, because the 20th level feature is tied to your subclass. They're not all winners, but I think it has the most potential to have your 20th level feature take what you love about your character and turn it up to 11. I know I've tried to build some homebrew subclasses in the past, and although I had some ideas for a really amazing capstone ability, it doesn't always make sense for the highest level subclass feature. Barbarians, for example, get their last subclass feature at 14th level, so you can't have an amazing subclass feature to really push your specific subclass over the edge because, at best, you can get a really good ability designed for 14th level play. That's balanced, to a degree, by the fact that their universal 20th level feature is pretty universally valuable for all Barbarian subclasses, but I'd trade it for something that takes my specific subclass to an awesome extreme.
Reducing smites to once per round may necessary to reduce power creep, I don't know yet. Expanding smites to include unarmed strikes and ranged weapons is not the right answer.
IMO reducing it to 1/round is a way of forcing paladins to use the Smite spells. Now instead of doing two regular smites you do one divine smite and one spell smite if you hit twice with your action.
Reducing smites to once per round may necessary to reduce power creep, I don't know yet. Expanding smites to include unarmed strikes and ranged weapons is not the right answer.
IMO reducing it to 1/round is a way of forcing paladins to use the Smite spells. Now instead of doing two regular smites you do one divine smite and one spell smite if you hit twice with your action.
I don't think that was the intent, since they changed Smite so that you cannot cast any other spells on the same turn that you smite, which pretty much makes the combo of using it with smite spells on the same turn impossible.
Reducing smites to once per round may necessary to reduce power creep, I don't know yet. Expanding smites to include unarmed strikes and ranged weapons is not the right answer.
IMO reducing it to 1/round is a way of forcing paladins to use the Smite spells. Now instead of doing two regular smites you do one divine smite and one spell smite if you hit twice with your action.
But you can’t use divine smite the same turn you cast a spell.
Also, it’s once per turn, not once per round. Like sneak attack. So you could use it on an opportunity attack, or other attack you might make on someone else’s turn, like a battle master giving you an attack.
Reducing smites to once per round may necessary to reduce power creep, I don't know yet. Expanding smites to include unarmed strikes and ranged weapons is not the right answer.
IMO reducing it to 1/round is a way of forcing paladins to use the Smite spells. Now instead of doing two regular smites you do one divine smite and one spell smite if you hit twice with your action.
It would be nice if they could work together that would be a reason to prepare them. But with the entire divine list levels 1-5 I'd be hard pressed preparing a smite spell at most levels since they are just smite+a usually small perk. Like a banishing smite spell or upcast spirit guardians when I already can get the damage part of the smite with a class ability.
I kind of think they should drop the smite spells and just add them as features you can add onto your smite X times per day.
Re-reading through the various 20th level features... honestly, I think Paladins have the best one, because the 20th level feature is tied to your subclass. They're not all winners, but I think it has the most potential to have your 20th level feature take what you love about your character and turn it up to 11. I know I've tried to build some homebrew subclasses in the past, and although I had some ideas for a really amazing capstone ability, it doesn't always make sense for the highest level subclass feature. Barbarians, for example, get their last subclass feature at 14th level, so you can't have an amazing subclass feature to really push your specific subclass over the edge because, at best, you can get a really good ability designed for 14th level play. That's balanced, to a degree, by the fact that their universal 20th level feature is pretty universally valuable for all Barbarian subclasses, but I'd trade it for something that takes my specific subclass to an awesome extreme.
I'll agree with that, paladins had the most fitting 20th level ability.
Honestly, if all the Paladin 20th level features were just repackaged as "Epic Boons" it would be a solid selection of boons with enough variety that you could probably find at least one that would benefit you regardless of class. I think that'd be a pretty cool way to handle it in general... Every Subclass comes with a tailor-made 20th level feature as an "Epic Boon", and at 20th level you can choose to take the tailor-made boon, or select one from a different class if it will help you more instead.
I personally would like to see a Moon Druid who loses all his magic, but perfects Wildshaping. If you try to combine a full caster and a wild shaping character you gonna end up losing on both sides. After Wild Shape losing all effects on your worn magic items, yeah feels great to lose spell attack or spell save dc, or maybe stat items. To Lose the extra amount of Hp is just fair, since the current level 20 Moon Druid is straight up unbeatable unless your Boss Monster can deal around 120 damage per Round to a a Mammoth...
To have just 10+WIS as your AC is damn bad, after level 14 of play, every Boss Monster will just auto success Hit you. To spam heal yourself with Healing Word each round may help you to get face smashed for some more rounds but you lose your spellslots faster than a warlock.
To lose every single feature, some here even say you lose your proficiencies, since those are "features" ist just a nerf in a way i cant value in numbers. Yes to use any class, sublass or racial feature, since its not forbidden right now, ends up in a total cluster**** of "how may this interact with my wildshape and may you allow it". Aasimar Winged Mammoth, a walking Dinosaur hanging down from the ceiling due to Beast Barbarian level 6 feature etc etc.
Right now Moon Druid is an absued broken cluster**** of too many good things.
This new version is lean, small, easy to handle, way less powerful and abusive but too damn weak to be fun to play or to be useful beyond level 14.
So my opinion, just go the way like World of Warcraft went with their Feral-Druid, deny their spellcasting and make them ferocious wild beasts and give them the power to be one.
I replied to this idea in the other paladin thread but suffice it to say I disagree. Unless it is unbalanced abilities should be broad and capable to be used in a wide range of ways so you can use the paladin class or any class to build a wide variety of mechanically and thematically distinct characters. Putting everything in a small box to avoid stepping on toes is not the way.
Then why have classes anyways? Without distinction, we could just allow all characters to just pick the mechanics they wanted and remove classes altogether. Not saying a modicum of that is bad. I like options. I often multi-class. There needs to be some way to retain their characteristics and roles though. After the homogeneity of the races being whatever you want them to be, now we're getting more generic characters with the groups. Martial Clerics and Paladins are more similar then ever before. Trying to be all things to all people is taking the distinctiveness away not only from the traditional races, but now from the classes as well.
I replied to this idea in the other paladin thread but suffice it to say I disagree. Unless it is unbalanced abilities should be broad and capable to be used in a wide range of ways so you can use the paladin class or any class to build a wide variety of mechanically and thematically distinct characters. Putting everything in a small box to avoid stepping on toes is not the way.
Then why have classes anyways? Without distinction, we could just allow all characters to just pick the mechanics they wanted and remove classes altogether. Not saying a modicum of that is bad. I like options. I often multi-class. There needs to be some way to retain their characteristics and roles though. After the homogeneity of the races being whatever you want them to be, now we're getting more generic characters with the groups. Martial Clerics and Paladins are more similar then ever before. Trying to be all things to all people is taking the distinctiveness away not only from the traditional races, but now from the classes as well.
Different classes should be different...but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have overlap, with different takes on how a basic character works.
Take, for example, the archer. There are several different classes that can have a take on that concept. You have the Fighter that can do the brute force assault type archer that does massive damage at a range. A Ranger will do more the woodcraft and ambush type, that hides out of view and uses magic and woodcraft to supplement his attacks. The Rogue is about sneaking around and performing long ranged assassinations. The Artificer that has a gizmo that shoots large numbers of arrows at enemies. A bit more exotic and you have a Cleric that uses the bow as an instrument for healing etc.
That's four different takes on what an archer can be, according to four different classes. I believe that's what's being said - not that classes should be identical or close to it, but each should be flexible enough so that, with tweaking via subclasses, they can present different takes on similar concepts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I replied to this idea in the other paladin thread but suffice it to say I disagree. Unless it is unbalanced abilities should be broad and capable to be used in a wide range of ways so you can use the paladin class or any class to build a wide variety of mechanically and thematically distinct characters. Putting everything in a small box to avoid stepping on toes is not the way.
Then why have classes anyways? Without distinction, we could just allow all characters to just pick the mechanics they wanted and remove classes altogether. Not saying a modicum of that is bad. I like options. I often multi-class. There needs to be some way to retain their characteristics and roles though. After the homogeneity of the races being whatever you want them to be, now we're getting more generic characters with the groups. Martial Clerics and Paladins are more similar then ever before. Trying to be all things to all people is taking the distinctiveness away not only from the traditional races, but now from the classes as well.
Different classes should be different...but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have overlap, with different takes on how a basic character works.
Take, for example, the archer. There are several different classes that can have a take on that concept. You have the Fighter that can do the brute force assault type archer that does massive damage at a range. A Ranger will do more the woodcraft and ambush type, that hides out of view and uses magic and woodcraft to supplement his attacks. The Rogue is about sneaking around and performing long ranged assassinations. The Artificer that has a gizmo that shoots large numbers of arrows at enemies. A bit more exotic and you have a Cleric that uses the bow as an instrument for healing etc.
That's four different takes on what an archer can be, according to four different classes. I believe that's what's being said - not that classes should be identical or close to it, but each should be flexible enough so that, with tweaking via subclasses, they can present different takes on similar concepts.
Pretty much. If sneak attack worked with unarmed strike which I think it should it wouldn't mean its the same as the monk. It would have one big attack under certain conditions(near ally etc.)the monk would have a range of ki abilities to tack on and would hit 4 times.(hopefully buffed from 5e, as damn monks need help). But it would be a cool assassin style ability as you would always have your sneak attack even in places where you were disarmed. A paladin archer is going to feel different than a ranger archer. A paladin should be about being a divine warrior with a oath not about being a dude in plate with a sword. Let people manifest a divine warrior in a variety of ways.
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
The issue with R5e Wild Shape - the one everybody's forgetting while they self-destruct over the first iteration of the One druid - is that it's not fair to the druid player. Every other class in R5e with one minor subclass exception is contained within the Player's Handbook, their rules are right there and easy to reference. But a druid? A druid has to go out and buy a Monster Manual and also probably a DMG to get a full listing of beast shapes they can change into, or wheedle and convince their DM to share access to books most DMs are loathe to let players touch. If the druid can do neither of these things? They get no Wild Shape.
Why should a druid player have to spend an extra hundred dollars just to gain access to one class feature?
I disagree with that statement for many reasons.
1. the players hand book actually has stat blocks. while not all of them it provides a varied options for the utility and feel
2. rangers are also dependent on stat blocks (more so the beastmaster). Druid is not alone.
3. the players don't actually have to own the material. The srd exists. The dm is specifically told to provide stats if a dm doesn't provide a way they are the problem. they don't even have to allow the player to see all the content just the relevant parts. tools exist to speed up this process.
4. DM facing classes may actually be good for the game and the sustainability of the game. it provides a transitional space some players need when moving to or from being a dm. the idea of the "mythological DM" is one of the most common concepts addressed in dm youtube videos.
The text from the UA is:
Saving throw proficiencies, skill, weapon, and armour proficiencies are all features of your class which this explicitly says you lose. This text is almost the same as what is used in Polymorph:
Anything not explicitly mentioned as something you keep is implied to be lost and replaced by those of the new statblock.
In UA Wildshape you have no skill proficiencies, no saving throw proficiencies, no weapon / armor proficiencies, no feats, no class features, no racial / background features except for the ability to Wildshape again / revert or using your beastial strikes.
I don't think that was that big of a change. It is an improvement but nothing earthshaking and not enough. And I've already talked about how I am not a fan of the 20th level epic thing to death. And the +1 to a stat thing up to 30while I dig, I think if they are going this route they need to be explicit that you get a epic boon every x XP, so far unless I missed it(which I easily could have) it looks like a one and done at 20th.
You missed it. The document recommends giving an Epic Boon every 30,000 xp above 355,000.
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 replied to this idea in the other paladin thread but suffice it to say I disagree. Unless it is unbalanced abilities should be broad and capable to be used in a wide range of ways so you can use the paladin class or any class to build a wide variety of mechanically and thematically distinct characters. Putting everything in a small box to avoid stepping on toes is not the way.
I understand the concept like how they probably pushed tiny creatures to level 11 in wild shape so a rogue could shine in stealth. I think the better option is to make the rogue so amazing at stealth if they focus on it a druid changing into a rat is still amateur hour. Some things I think are unbalanced, like imo find familiar, its too cheap of a low to no risk scouting technique. At least if the druid turned into the rat to sneak in they have skin in the game. A paladin smiting with a arrow does not seem unbalanced to me, they are blowing a spell to do a little bit more damage.
Thanks, I still would prefer it be separate from the 20oth level thing. 20th level in your class, should be something amazing around your class not something cool that is kind of generic or themed to any warrior type.
I think I do agree that Epic Boons still feel like they could be better... I feel like they're afraid to make them too amazing, for whatever reason. Although to be fair, a lot of 20th level features were pretty dull in the first place. Oh, I get 4 sorcery points when I complete a short rest? Well la-dee-da, I guess I'm unstoppable now. I can spend one minute to get my Warlock slots back? Oh good, a worse version of Catnap, a 3rd level spell that the other classes can get as early as 5th level.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Agreed that many were lame, but they should have fixed them, as right now they just shifted the lame to 18th level. I'd of rolled with balancing them around the 20th level barbarian ability. My main issue is it doesn't seem like a peak of your class ability as any character or anyone from your group can take it. Have the first epic boon locked or from a small list of 3 that are specific to your class. Put effort in to make it really fit the idea of a exemplar of fighter/rogue etc.
Re-reading through the various 20th level features... honestly, I think Paladins have the best one, because the 20th level feature is tied to your subclass. They're not all winners, but I think it has the most potential to have your 20th level feature take what you love about your character and turn it up to 11. I know I've tried to build some homebrew subclasses in the past, and although I had some ideas for a really amazing capstone ability, it doesn't always make sense for the highest level subclass feature. Barbarians, for example, get their last subclass feature at 14th level, so you can't have an amazing subclass feature to really push your specific subclass over the edge because, at best, you can get a really good ability designed for 14th level play. That's balanced, to a degree, by the fact that their universal 20th level feature is pretty universally valuable for all Barbarian subclasses, but I'd trade it for something that takes my specific subclass to an awesome extreme.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
IMO reducing it to 1/round is a way of forcing paladins to use the Smite spells. Now instead of doing two regular smites you do one divine smite and one spell smite if you hit twice with your action.
I don't think that was the intent, since they changed Smite so that you cannot cast any other spells on the same turn that you smite, which pretty much makes the combo of using it with smite spells on the same turn impossible.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
But you can’t use divine smite the same turn you cast a spell.
Also, it’s once per turn, not once per round. Like sneak attack. So you could use it on an opportunity attack, or other attack you might make on someone else’s turn, like a battle master giving you an attack.
It would be nice if they could work together that would be a reason to prepare them. But with the entire divine list levels 1-5 I'd be hard pressed preparing a smite spell at most levels since they are just smite+a usually small perk. Like a banishing smite spell or upcast spirit guardians when I already can get the damage part of the smite with a class ability.
I kind of think they should drop the smite spells and just add them as features you can add onto your smite X times per day.
I'll agree with that, paladins had the most fitting 20th level ability.
Honestly, if all the Paladin 20th level features were just repackaged as "Epic Boons" it would be a solid selection of boons with enough variety that you could probably find at least one that would benefit you regardless of class. I think that'd be a pretty cool way to handle it in general... Every Subclass comes with a tailor-made 20th level feature as an "Epic Boon", and at 20th level you can choose to take the tailor-made boon, or select one from a different class if it will help you more instead.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I personally would like to see a Moon Druid who loses all his magic, but perfects Wildshaping. If you try to combine a full caster and a wild shaping character you gonna end up losing on both sides. After Wild Shape losing all effects on your worn magic items, yeah feels great to lose spell attack or spell save dc, or maybe stat items. To Lose the extra amount of Hp is just fair, since the current level 20 Moon Druid is straight up unbeatable unless your Boss Monster can deal around 120 damage per Round to a a Mammoth...
To have just 10+WIS as your AC is damn bad, after level 14 of play, every Boss Monster will just auto success Hit you. To spam heal yourself with Healing Word each round may help you to get face smashed for some more rounds but you lose your spellslots faster than a warlock.
To lose every single feature, some here even say you lose your proficiencies, since those are "features" ist just a nerf in a way i cant value in numbers. Yes to use any class, sublass or racial feature, since its not forbidden right now, ends up in a total cluster**** of "how may this interact with my wildshape and may you allow it". Aasimar Winged Mammoth, a walking Dinosaur hanging down from the ceiling due to Beast Barbarian level 6 feature etc etc.
Right now Moon Druid is an absued broken cluster**** of too many good things.
This new version is lean, small, easy to handle, way less powerful and abusive but too damn weak to be fun to play or to be useful beyond level 14.
So my opinion, just go the way like World of Warcraft went with their Feral-Druid, deny their spellcasting and make them ferocious wild beasts and give them the power to be one.
Then why have classes anyways? Without distinction, we could just allow all characters to just pick the mechanics they wanted and remove classes altogether. Not saying a modicum of that is bad. I like options. I often multi-class. There needs to be some way to retain their characteristics and roles though. After the homogeneity of the races being whatever you want them to be, now we're getting more generic characters with the groups. Martial Clerics and Paladins are more similar then ever before. Trying to be all things to all people is taking the distinctiveness away not only from the traditional races, but now from the classes as well.
Different classes should be different...but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have overlap, with different takes on how a basic character works.
Take, for example, the archer. There are several different classes that can have a take on that concept. You have the Fighter that can do the brute force assault type archer that does massive damage at a range. A Ranger will do more the woodcraft and ambush type, that hides out of view and uses magic and woodcraft to supplement his attacks. The Rogue is about sneaking around and performing long ranged assassinations. The Artificer that has a gizmo that shoots large numbers of arrows at enemies. A bit more exotic and you have a Cleric that uses the bow as an instrument for healing etc.
That's four different takes on what an archer can be, according to four different classes. I believe that's what's being said - not that classes should be identical or close to it, but each should be flexible enough so that, with tweaking via subclasses, they can present different takes on similar concepts.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Pretty much. If sneak attack worked with unarmed strike which I think it should it wouldn't mean its the same as the monk. It would have one big attack under certain conditions(near ally etc.)the monk would have a range of ki abilities to tack on and would hit 4 times.(hopefully buffed from 5e, as damn monks need help). But it would be a cool assassin style ability as you would always have your sneak attack even in places where you were disarmed. A paladin archer is going to feel different than a ranger archer. A paladin should be about being a divine warrior with a oath not about being a dude in plate with a sword. Let people manifest a divine warrior in a variety of ways.
Reposting from the other thread because it's also relevant here:
Please do not contact or message me.
I disagree with that statement for many reasons.
1. the players hand book actually has stat blocks. while not all of them it provides a varied options for the utility and feel
2. rangers are also dependent on stat blocks (more so the beastmaster). Druid is not alone.
3. the players don't actually have to own the material. The srd exists. The dm is specifically told to provide stats if a dm doesn't provide a way they are the problem. they don't even have to allow the player to see all the content just the relevant parts. tools exist to speed up this process.
4. DM facing classes may actually be good for the game and the sustainability of the game. it provides a transitional space some players need when moving to or from being a dm. the idea of the "mythological DM" is one of the most common concepts addressed in dm youtube videos.