I really dont like rangers or paladins getting weapon mastery. They already have fighting styles and magic they dont need to be taking even MORE from the warriors. The rogue doesn't have magic so him getting mastery is fine. My opinion if you are a caster, full or half, you shouldn't get mastery, and if you dont have spells you should have mastery.
Subclasses will now get abilities at the same levels as they do in the current Player's Handbook.
That is terrible for some classes, like Sorcerer, getting their last feature at 6th level in 90% of the games.
Could be the monk a half-Expert? It already gets things like Evasion and other good movement/resistance features. Maybe giving 3 or 4 skill proficiencies at start plus some Expertise (1 instead 2) and giving access to Thieves' Tools. Does not wear armor so can be silent. For small groups it could be great, or for players that wants a versatile, but good and funny in combat, character. And it uses Wisdom and Dex so good Perception and Stealth, it is already good with many Rogue things only needs the final step.
I really dont like rangers or paladins getting weapon mastery. They already have fighting styles and magic they dont need to be taking even MORE from the warriors. The rogue doesn't have magic so him getting mastery is fine. My opinion if you are a caster, full or half, you shouldn't get mastery, and if you dont have spells you should have mastery.
Paladin and Ranger get half-spellcasting progression, which is significantly weaker than full spellcasting progression, Paladin and Ranger are still essentially martial classes that rely on weapon damage but have some limited access to spells, so this argument really doesn't make sense. What the classes need is balance, not artificially restricting features away for no real reason, after all at no point were weapon masteries described as being "warrior" only and pretty sure nobody wants a repeat of 5E Ranger where they were so in the middle that vast sections of the community would just say, 'play a fighter with a bow, it's much better', which is likely a huge part of why Ranger is getting it. As for Paladin, we know Paladin's NOVA potential got nerfed, so again, not sure why people are passing these opinions before we even get to see how the implementation is being planned for the UA specifically.
I really dont like rangers or paladins getting weapon mastery. They already have fighting styles and magic they dont need to be taking even MORE from the warriors. The rogue doesn't have magic so him getting mastery is fine. My opinion if you are a caster, full or half, you shouldn't get mastery, and if you dont have spells you should have mastery.
Paladin and Ranger get half-spellcasting progression, which is significantly weaker than full spellcasting progression, Paladin and Ranger are still essentially martial classes that rely on weapon damage but have some limited access to spells, so this argument really doesn't make sense. What the classes need is balance, not artificially restricting features away for no real reason, after all at no point were weapon masteries described as being "warrior" only and pretty sure nobody wants a repeat of 5E Ranger where they were so in the middle that vast sections of the community would just say, 'play a fighter with a bow, it's much better', which is likely a huge part of why Ranger is getting it. As for Paladin, we know Paladin's NOVA potential got nerfed, so again, not sure why people are passing these opinions before we even get to see how the implementation is being planned for the UA specifically.
Experts are defined by having expertise. Priests are defined by having Channel Divinity. Mages are defined by having complete access to the largest spell list in the game. Warriors are defined by having less than everybody else. So I don't think that protecting the one thing Warriors have is "artificially restricting features away for no real reason."
Paladins and Rangers have the ability to cast powerful spells that augment their martial capabilities in no small way. To compensate for this, they should generally be somewhat worse at using weapons than the classes that have no such advantage, at least before factoring in the aid of their spells. But if every single trick that Warriors get goes to everybody else, that's never going to happen.
It doesn't really make a difference if they only get to choose one mastery or something because most of the time only one mastery will be used, and it doesn't really matter if they intend to give Fighters and Barbarians better ways to use their masteries because they aren't going to be in the playtest. So basically, no matter how it's implemented in the playtest, the only thing I need to know to pass judgement is that Paladins and Rangers are going to get masteries.
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)
The Fighter get (or should) more fighting styles (in this case it should get some extra one/s) and weapon masteries (already get). That grants weapon versatility, like using a sword for melee and using a bow when required, taking advantage of the fighting style and weapon mastery for both.
So giving 1 weapon mastery to Paladin and Ranger would not be bad, as they are attached to only a weapon per long rest to take advantage.
Remember that Fighter also gets extra ASI, that is not bad with all these new options, with so many feats that now also increases your ability score. It chains one at level 4 and another at level 5 (at the same time than multi-attack), doing this level 5 a big step in whatever you want, with1 feat and ability score already at 20, or 2 feats and ability at 19, letting to get at level 8 the 20 with 3 feats.
I just want Warriors to have something that makes them all better at using weapons than everybody else. If that's not going to be weapon mastery, fine, but since that's all we've been given and now it's being taken away without a promise of something in return, I'm not going to be happy about it.
Right now, the Warrior group is really just "these are the guys without any of those other things," which bugs me because all of the other class groups have cool abilities whereas all Warriors had were masteries. Three groups defined by common abilities and one group defined by absence really seems like bad design to me.
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 may not have communicated my point clearly enough. Here, let me try to make it clearer.
Experts: Expertise Priests: Channel Divinity Mages: Arcane Spell List Warriors: None of the above
I wasn't saying that Fighters are worse at using weapons than Paladins (although I very easily could, considering the only practically unique thing they get in Tier 1 is Action Surge). I was saying that the lack of uniqueness within the Warrior class group seems like bad design to me, and that I think they should have a feature that lets them stand out and makes the fact that they are Warriors actually matter.
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 may not have communicated my point clearly enough. Here, let me try to make it clearer.
Experts: Expertise Priests: Channel Divinity Mages: Arcane Spell List Warriors: None of the above
I wasn't saying that Fighters are worse at using weapons than Paladins (although I very easily could, considering the only practically unique thing they get in Tier 1 is Action Surge). I was saying that the lack of uniqueness within the Warrior class group seems like bad design to me, and that I think they should have a feature that lets them stand out and makes the fact that they are Warriors actually matter.
I believe I understand what you're saying and yes, Warrior Group needs something, it's just weapon masteries is not that thing. The thing Warriors need, in my opinion is something resource based, like monk's ki abilities or battlemaster's manoeuvrers. Since resource based abilities are meant to be more powerful but more limited due to resource.
It really bugs me that Paladins and Rangers are going to get weapon mastery. The Warriors are supposed to be the best of the best when it comes to weaponry, but if you give all the cool tricks that the Warriors get to everybody and their mom then what's even the point. Fighter shouldn't just be "I'm Paladin but without the spells," it should be "I'm Paladin but I'm way better at using a weapon because I don't have spells to rely on." Paladin and Ranger are FINE, and as long as Paladin has half of its current tricks it'll remain one of the best classes in the game. So why do we need to take away from other classes to give them more?
It bugs me a bit that Rogues will get it too, but to a lesser extent because they really need the help. I'd prefer if they gave something different (and bigger) to help them out though, for the sake of niche protection.
It kind of bugs me as well, but figured it was going to happen so wasn’t much of a shock. I hope that they restrict them to maybe one mastery option. Let the Warrior group have access to more masteries, with fighter mixing them like in the UA
Rogue maybe two, with possibly limiting them to certain masteries (like Nick, Sap, Vex)?
And I really hope they don’t screw up the Monk.
Same thing as ThriKreenWarrior I find that putting Weapon Mastery in lots of other classes makes the feature a lot less special and unique, when we could have had more cool class specific and class themed features to help make up for any imbalance.
The Weapon Masteries are there to make weapon choice matter and increase versatility for Martials in general. They are not class features. Warriors have class features that interact with Weapon Masteries in the same way the Mage classes have features that interact with spells.
I agree that Warriors need more options that help make them stand out, but Weapon Masteries were never intended to be that.
Druid has reverted to picking Beast statblocks. But now you get your beast form's HP as temp HP (i.e. doesn't stack with any other temp HP you have) or 3x your druid level whichever is lower, you get your base AC (not counting shields) on the animal form if it's higher, and you only get 3 beast statblocks to start with (going up to 5) one of which can be changed on a long rest..
As a member of Team Templates I'm disappointed, but it is an improvement over 2014 and does solve the Tiny Forms, Book Diving during combat and Super Brown Bear Tank issues.
Monk meanwhile, they barely fixed anything, but I'll take that to the other thread.
The Weapon Masteries are there to make weapon choice matter and increase versatility for Martials in general. They are not class features. Warriors have class features that interact with Weapon Masteries in the same way the Mage classes have features that interact with spells.
I agree that Warriors need more options that help make them stand out, but Weapon Masteries were never intended to be that.
Weapon Mastery is a class feature, because it only applies to certain classes and can only be used by ones that have the feature in question. Honestly, I think that regardless of whether or not Weapon Mastery was intended to make Warriors and only Warriors stand out (and it seemed like that was the goal to me), it does frustrate me that something that could be special and cool for the group of classes is now quite widespread to Rogue, Monk, Ranger, and Paladin.
I wish that the non-Warriors got to keep what tied to their group of classes and their group alone, but now the Warriors don't really have anything special or unique going for their group. If they needed something to help them stand out, then this was the opportunity for it because it's hard to add a lot more without completely causing a power imbalance. If I remember correctly, Weapon Mastery for Fighter was about the class being very skilled with weapons. But now almost every class is like that.
I don't know what Weapon Mastery was intended to be. I just now what it was an opportunity for making Warriors unique and cool, but that the opportunity for that has been wasted.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Druid is... fine... I guess, Wild Shape is at least functional and Moon isn't broken, Land spell lists are not complete garbage, but Circle of the Sea and Circle of the Stars are the only ones I'd be excited to play, though at least it is comparable to cleric in build diversity now.
Ranger is back to being the worst Expert at being Expert at stuff, (thank you play testers), but it isn't terrible, basically just Tasha's Ranger with some fixes to the ranger-specific spells so they aren't straight up worse than the druid spells.
Monk is in general worse than the Beastmaster's Beast Companion, so I think that is all that needs to be said there....
Bard is buffed compared to the 5e version and is back to being arguably the most powerful spellcaster in the game.
Paladin's basically the same just with all their unique spells back to being unique to them.
Not much happened with subclasses, War Cleric got big buffs to weapon usage, Bard got an unarmed-brawler subclass that is better than a Monk at being a Monk (I wonder if this was one of the designers losing patience with the designer in charge of Monk and being like "I bet I can make a better Monk than you even thought it's a Bard subclass"), Monk's subclasses got nerfed. Druid got a new subclass clearly made by the same designer that made the Twilight Cleric.
My first impression is that this UA goes back to what was in 2014. That seems like a bad idea to me because then, why am I going to buy the edition, or whatever, if it's already what was there before?
Hunters Mark, I don't mind the switching to increased damage once per turn. But the spell badly needs to drop concentration. When its your class feature and its sort of bad since you have better options to sustain with I just don't see the value. That was one of the really good changes to the ranger, it just needed maybe to be a few levels higher so it wasn't a pure dip grab.
And did they drop cantrips off of ranger/paladin. I don't think that would be needed.
I really dont like rangers or paladins getting weapon mastery. They already have fighting styles and magic they dont need to be taking even MORE from the warriors. The rogue doesn't have magic so him getting mastery is fine. My opinion if you are a caster, full or half, you shouldn't get mastery, and if you dont have spells you should have mastery.
Agreed. Each group of classes needs something that defines their niche. Experts get expertise, priests get magic themed around support and control, mages get magic themed around damage and utilities, warriors get.... nothing unique. Weapons nobody else can use? Nope. Armor? Nope. Unique skills? No. Weapon mastery? Nope again. They need to decide what the one thing is that makes warriors unique, and give that to only the warriors and not warriors plus anyone who can swing a sword.
I really dont like rangers or paladins getting weapon mastery. They already have fighting styles and magic they dont need to be taking even MORE from the warriors. The rogue doesn't have magic so him getting mastery is fine. My opinion if you are a caster, full or half, you shouldn't get mastery, and if you dont have spells you should have mastery.
That is terrible for some classes, like Sorcerer, getting their last feature at 6th level in 90% of the games.
Could be the monk a half-Expert? It already gets things like Evasion and other good movement/resistance features. Maybe giving 3 or 4 skill proficiencies at start plus some Expertise (1 instead 2) and giving access to Thieves' Tools. Does not wear armor so can be silent. For small groups it could be great, or for players that wants a versatile, but good and funny in combat, character. And it uses Wisdom and Dex so good Perception and Stealth, it is already good with many Rogue things only needs the final step.
Paladin and Ranger get half-spellcasting progression, which is significantly weaker than full spellcasting progression, Paladin and Ranger are still essentially martial classes that rely on weapon damage but have some limited access to spells, so this argument really doesn't make sense. What the classes need is balance, not artificially restricting features away for no real reason, after all at no point were weapon masteries described as being "warrior" only and pretty sure nobody wants a repeat of 5E Ranger where they were so in the middle that vast sections of the community would just say, 'play a fighter with a bow, it's much better', which is likely a huge part of why Ranger is getting it. As for Paladin, we know Paladin's NOVA potential got nerfed, so again, not sure why people are passing these opinions before we even get to see how the implementation is being planned for the UA specifically.
Experts are defined by having expertise. Priests are defined by having Channel Divinity. Mages are defined by having complete access to the largest spell list in the game. Warriors are defined by having less than everybody else. So I don't think that protecting the one thing Warriors have is "artificially restricting features away for no real reason."
Paladins and Rangers have the ability to cast powerful spells that augment their martial capabilities in no small way. To compensate for this, they should generally be somewhat worse at using weapons than the classes that have no such advantage, at least before factoring in the aid of their spells. But if every single trick that Warriors get goes to everybody else, that's never going to happen.
It doesn't really make a difference if they only get to choose one mastery or something because most of the time only one mastery will be used, and it doesn't really matter if they intend to give Fighters and Barbarians better ways to use their masteries because they aren't going to be in the playtest. So basically, no matter how it's implemented in the playtest, the only thing I need to know to pass judgement is that Paladins and Rangers are going to get masteries.
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)
The Fighter get (or should) more fighting styles (in this case it should get some extra one/s) and weapon masteries (already get). That grants weapon versatility, like using a sword for melee and using a bow when required, taking advantage of the fighting style and weapon mastery for both.
So giving 1 weapon mastery to Paladin and Ranger would not be bad, as they are attached to only a weapon per long rest to take advantage.
Remember that Fighter also gets extra ASI, that is not bad with all these new options, with so many feats that now also increases your ability score. It chains one at level 4 and another at level 5 (at the same time than multi-attack), doing this level 5 a big step in whatever you want, with1 feat and ability score already at 20, or 2 feats and ability at 19, letting to get at level 8 the 20 with 3 feats.
I just want Warriors to have something that makes them all better at using weapons than everybody else. If that's not going to be weapon mastery, fine, but since that's all we've been given and now it's being taken away without a promise of something in return, I'm not going to be happy about it.
Right now, the Warrior group is really just "these are the guys without any of those other things," which bugs me because all of the other class groups have cool abilities whereas all Warriors had were masteries. Three groups defined by common abilities and one group defined by absence really seems like bad design to me.
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 may not have communicated my point clearly enough. Here, let me try to make it clearer.
Experts: Expertise
Priests: Channel Divinity
Mages: Arcane Spell List
Warriors: None of the above
I wasn't saying that Fighters are worse at using weapons than Paladins (although I very easily could, considering the only practically unique thing they get in Tier 1 is Action Surge). I was saying that the lack of uniqueness within the Warrior class group seems like bad design to me, and that I think they should have a feature that lets them stand out and makes the fact that they are Warriors actually matter.
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 believe I understand what you're saying and yes, Warrior Group needs something, it's just weapon masteries is not that thing. The thing Warriors need, in my opinion is something resource based, like monk's ki abilities or battlemaster's manoeuvrers. Since resource based abilities are meant to be more powerful but more limited due to resource.
Same thing as ThriKreenWarrior I find that putting Weapon Mastery in lots of other classes makes the feature a lot less special and unique, when we could have had more cool class specific and class themed features to help make up for any imbalance.
But honestly... I expected this too.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.The Weapon Masteries are there to make weapon choice matter and increase versatility for Martials in general. They are not class features. Warriors have class features that interact with Weapon Masteries in the same way the Mage classes have features that interact with spells.
I agree that Warriors need more options that help make them stand out, but Weapon Masteries were never intended to be that.
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
It is up!
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
is it I see it as premiering in 50 minutes ?
Druid has reverted to picking Beast statblocks. But now you get your beast form's HP as temp HP (i.e. doesn't stack with any other temp HP you have) or 3x your druid level whichever is lower, you get your base AC (not counting shields) on the animal form if it's higher, and you only get 3 beast statblocks to start with (going up to 5) one of which can be changed on a long rest..
As a member of Team Templates I'm disappointed, but it is an improvement over 2014 and does solve the Tiny Forms, Book Diving during combat and Super Brown Bear Tank issues.
Monk meanwhile, they barely fixed anything, but I'll take that to the other thread.
a the file is up and the video premiers in 4 minutes
Weapon Mastery is a class feature, because it only applies to certain classes and can only be used by ones that have the feature in question. Honestly, I think that regardless of whether or not Weapon Mastery was intended to make Warriors and only Warriors stand out (and it seemed like that was the goal to me), it does frustrate me that something that could be special and cool for the group of classes is now quite widespread to Rogue, Monk, Ranger, and Paladin.
I wish that the non-Warriors got to keep what tied to their group of classes and their group alone, but now the Warriors don't really have anything special or unique going for their group. If they needed something to help them stand out, then this was the opportunity for it because it's hard to add a lot more without completely causing a power imbalance. If I remember correctly, Weapon Mastery for Fighter was about the class being very skilled with weapons. But now almost every class is like that.
I don't know what Weapon Mastery was intended to be. I just now what it was an opportunity for making Warriors unique and cool, but that the opportunity for that has been wasted.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Well it's up.
Rogue is now super cool.
Druid is... fine... I guess, Wild Shape is at least functional and Moon isn't broken, Land spell lists are not complete garbage, but Circle of the Sea and Circle of the Stars are the only ones I'd be excited to play, though at least it is comparable to cleric in build diversity now.
Ranger is back to being the worst Expert at being Expert at stuff, (thank you play testers), but it isn't terrible, basically just Tasha's Ranger with some fixes to the ranger-specific spells so they aren't straight up worse than the druid spells.
Monk is in general worse than the Beastmaster's Beast Companion, so I think that is all that needs to be said there....
Bard is buffed compared to the 5e version and is back to being arguably the most powerful spellcaster in the game.
Paladin's basically the same just with all their unique spells back to being unique to them.
Not much happened with subclasses, War Cleric got big buffs to weapon usage, Bard got an unarmed-brawler subclass that is better than a Monk at being a Monk (I wonder if this was one of the designers losing patience with the designer in charge of Monk and being like "I bet I can make a better Monk than you even thought it's a Bard subclass"), Monk's subclasses got nerfed. Druid got a new subclass clearly made by the same designer that made the Twilight Cleric.
My first impression is that this UA goes back to what was in 2014.
That seems like a bad idea to me because then, why am I going to buy the edition, or whatever, if it's already what was there before?
From my quick overview.
The rogue is good, the rest is meh to bad.
Hunters Mark, I don't mind the switching to increased damage once per turn. But the spell badly needs to drop concentration. When its your class feature and its sort of bad since you have better options to sustain with I just don't see the value. That was one of the really good changes to the ranger, it just needed maybe to be a few levels higher so it wasn't a pure dip grab.
And did they drop cantrips off of ranger/paladin. I don't think that would be needed.
Agreed. Each group of classes needs something that defines their niche. Experts get expertise, priests get magic themed around support and control, mages get magic themed around damage and utilities, warriors get.... nothing unique. Weapons nobody else can use? Nope. Armor? Nope. Unique skills? No. Weapon mastery? Nope again. They need to decide what the one thing is that makes warriors unique, and give that to only the warriors and not warriors plus anyone who can swing a sword.
I am kind of surprised they are keeping the one level dip in cleric for heavy armor.