Does this allow the use of a Wand twice per round? I just want to make sure I am reading that right.
3RD LEVEL: FAST HANDS As a Bonus Action, you can do one of the following: Sleight of Hand. Make a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check to pick a lock or disarm a trap with Thieves’ Tools or to pick a pocket. Use an Object. Take the Use an Object action, or take the Magic action to use a magic item that requires that action.
If the wand isn't casting a spell I guess? If its casting a spell the normal spell restrictions would apply.
almost every comments in the video : "give subclass standardisation", and yet they still want to go back, this is crazy
Yeah, I dunno why they're doing this. I did see a few complaints about standardized subclasses messing with "backwards compatibility" when the change was first introduced, but this modification really helped classes like the Rogue and so I don't want to see it get discarded.
Since YouTube comments are nowhere near a perfect metric though, I hope that this will be on the next survey.
I was one of those comments, standardized progressions just make so much sense as it opens up the subclass design beautifully. We can get cross-class subclasses, prestige subclasses etc.
If the concern is subclasses that don't get enough features like bard, just give them extra low-level ones. Or let them take an extra 1st-level feat as the missing feature.
Ultimately I ca live with the 2014 progressions as long as subclass acquisition is standardized at 3rd, but damn is it still the worst of both worlds.
I have to say that this UA has disappointed me a lot. I see a lot of things that are just going back to what they were in 2014, but with little changes. If that's going to be the way, I don't think I'm going to have the need to buy the new books. If I buy the books it is to have a fresh start. There are things I like, of course. Like for example what they have done with the Rogue. But overall it's a disappointing UA.
I am kind of surprised they are keeping the one level dip in cleric for heavy armor.
And Martial Weapons. So full armor and weapons for any caster with only 1 Cleric level.
Rogue Cunning Strike overpowered. They set all the costs 1d6 to be fixed by testers obviously. And the Poison is like a joke only requiring to have the tools, even if you have no idea how to use them (proficiency should be required). The Withdraw should cost half (rounding down) your dice and with the cunning action you can totally avoid any attack against you with a hit-and-run tactic. As summary, each one should have a requisite not clear to me at this moment. And because all of this, I can't understand yet why any Rogue should close to the target if can do the same at safe distance with ranged attacks with no penalty for its Sneak Attack.
In the other hand, Cunning Action should give dash and hide both at once, for you to reposition.
Correct me if I am wrong, so ANY Cleric adds its Wis to cantrips damage, but any other like Sorcerer or Wizard not?
Must be a joke, if that is at final, I’ll apply it to everyone. Stop that favoring Clerics so much by the face please.
They get the Blessed Strikes feature at Level 7. They can choose. EITHER Divine Strike where they can add 1d8 Radiant/Necrotic damage to a weapon attack once per turn, OR Potent Spellcasting where they can add their Wisdom modifier to the damage rolls of Divine cantrips, which will average out to about the same amount of damage.
I was looking forward to see the monk, and I'm disappointed.
Yes, they addressed the low damage by increasing the die (ironically, College of Dance gets unarmed damage die increase sooner), and separated unarmed damage from weapons. But unarmed fighting has no alternatives to weapon masteries. Only Open Hand subclass gets it. Grapple and shove depend on Str, and there's no adjustment for these options to work with Dex for monks.
Monk's baseline survivability is exactly where it was. Same HP and AC. The monk is still just as squishy. For some reason, a warrior in pursuit of absolute physical perfection doesn't even match fighter or ranger in vitality. They have Deflect Energy, Self-Restoration, and Disciplined Survivor going on for them, but that doesn't even come close to 3,5e monk with their immunities and magic resistance that made spells fail against the monk in roughly 50% of cases.
Resource starvation has been band-aided by Heightened Metabolism, that comes online only at level 7. It's a crutch, not a solution. Why not just start with 6 or 10 discipline points and gain an additional point every other level?
Overall, if you want to play as an unarmed, unarmored combatant, you're way better off playing a College of Dance bard. Same damage, same HP and AC, only you're a full caster of any spell list. I just don't understand WotC's irrational fear of making monks strong, they are consistently subpar in every edition.
Correct me if I am wrong, so ANY Cleric adds its Wis to cantrips damage, but any other like Sorcerer or Wizard not?
Must be a joke, if that is at final, I’ll apply it to everyone. Stop that favoring Clerics so much by the face please.
They get the Blessed Strikes feature at Level 7. They can choose. EITHER Divine Strike where they can add 1d8 Radiant/Necrotic damage to a weapon attack once per turn, OR Potent Spellcasting where they can add their Wisdom modifier to the damage rolls of Divine cantrips, which will average out to about the same amount of damage.
And why other caster classes like Sorcerer or Wizard cannot enhance their cantrips? Not fair at all. If it would be a specific Cleric subclass specialized would be OK, but for all the Clerics as base class feature? No way.
But isnt that why they are different classes though? Wizards and Sorcs get to do things Clerics cant and clerics, amongst other things, get to enhance their cantrips. Not saying your concern is not valid, perhaps all cantrips should add a modifier, but I dont think theres an inherent problem with one caster getting it where others do not.
Correct me if I am wrong, so ANY Cleric adds its Wis to cantrips damage, but any other like Sorcerer or Wizard not?
Must be a joke, if that is at final, I’ll apply it to everyone. Stop that favoring Clerics so much by the face please.
They get the Blessed Strikes feature at Level 7. They can choose. EITHER Divine Strike where they can add 1d8 Radiant/Necrotic damage to a weapon attack once per turn, OR Potent Spellcasting where they can add their Wisdom modifier to the damage rolls of Divine cantrips, which will average out to about the same amount of damage.
And why other caster classes like Sorcerer or Wizard cannot enhance their cantrips? Not fair at all. If it would be a specific Cleric subclass specialized would be OK, but for all the Clerics as base class feature? No way.
Maybe it's because some arcane cantrips compared to clerics tend to be somewhat more powerful in terms of damage?
I wish they had included the Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard ... even if they didn't have adjustments since the last UA, having the extra subclasses would have been nice.
And I wish they had stuck with the unified/normalized subclass levels across all classes.
Bard: hate that you cant get healing and illusion enchantment stuff on the same bard until level 10: my original solve was enchantment,transmutation, illusion and divination from arcane with necromancy and abjuration from primal.
Cleric: step in the right direction, want a different domain than war. I would prefer storms. Also dont want them to have mastery unless we give more to all the warrior classes.
Druid: the health and AC thing from wildshape needs to be baseline. The class is set up in a way that suggests wild shape focus or caster focus are both allowed for all of the subclasses. Dont want a hexblade situation where choosing the wild shape (pact of blade) is a trap for everyone except one subclass.
Monk: nerfs + buffs in a place where more classes are seeing buffs. Acrobatic movement is too late to make a real difference as is the metabolism ability. Level 10 defenses are solid though with near immunity to many of the most common effects. Still needs help. Monk dex Unarmed not working for grapple or shove is a massive oversight.
Paladin: give them back the cantrips and remove mastery, if not warrior classes need something to make them special.
Ranger: give them cantrips and remove mastery if not warrior classes need something to make them special. Deft explorer is worst of both worlds between expertise and natural explorer. Hunter's mark should lose concentration when upcast.
Correct me if I am wrong, so ANY Cleric adds its Wis to cantrips damage, but any other like Sorcerer or Wizard not?
Must be a joke, if that is at final, I’ll apply it to everyone. Stop that favoring Clerics so much by the face please.
They get the Blessed Strikes feature at Level 7. They can choose. EITHER Divine Strike where they can add 1d8 Radiant/Necrotic damage to a weapon attack once per turn, OR Potent Spellcasting where they can add their Wisdom modifier to the damage rolls of Divine cantrips, which will average out to about the same amount of damage.
And why other caster classes like Sorcerer or Wizard cannot enhance their cantrips? Not fair at all. If it would be a specific Cleric subclass specialized would be OK, but for all the Clerics as base class feature? No way.
Maybe it's because some arcane cantrips compared to clerics tend to be somewhat more powerful in terms of damage?
Sacred Flame d8 of a very reliable damage type, effective against vampire regen. Toll the Dead, the exact same than Arcane.
What you have more in Arcane is diversity, but you could remove most of them if we focus on effectiveness, they are more for having options to fit into themed character, but not really required for mechanics.
Giving ability modifiers bonus is a huge advantage for cantrips, so cannot think why the Cleric, not "some Cleric", but "all Cleric", must be the best cantrip attacker.
The previous version of the ability was fine, the extra d8 for melee attacks, OK is balanced and you got in danger at melee. But the version for cantrips is a huge improvement over others for free. It's simply not fair for the other classes, with cantrips as their base attack method.
Notice that I already was thinking about adding it reducing the damage die for balance, but avoiding the disappointment of rolling 1's.
Frankly, I think that paladin and ranger could use a choice between cantrips and weapon masteries, as well as features that use their Cha/Wis more effectively. So that when you pick a holy warrior class, you could choose whether you're more holy or more warrior, and as a ranger, whether you're more primal or more commando.
The reason Clerics get a boost to cantrip damage while the average Arcane caster doesn't is for the exact same reason Clerics have traditionally had better martial capabilities than the average Arcane caster: because Arcane magic is more offensively-oriented than Divine magic. Wizards and Sorcerers will typically use their spell slots on enemies, while Clerics will more often need their spell slots for supportive spells and thus get better "basic" attacks.
But the healing is not even an option for Arcane, so I see no reason or anything to compensate. Divine has really good damage spells, or there is someone not thinking that Spirit Guardians is an amazing spell? (depending the case even better than Arcane, and the Arcane don't have that option of damage during time at level 3).
In the other hand, spells are limited, cantrips are unlimited. Subtract the spells used for utility and etc...
Then, if we have to "compensate" Clerics in damage because spells, we should compensate Arcane to heal and getting armor?
I'd like the old version applied to melee, related precisely as Clerics get some martial proficiency like armor/shields. The current one is terrible.
Blessed Strikes really does seem like a weird holdover from 2014, when subclasses differentiated themselves by either giving Potent Spellcasting or Divine Strike. Even if it wasn't a very well-designed feature, it made more sense than the current version. I'd prefer something new, instead of yet another vestige of 2014 which lacks real purpose.
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 reason Clerics get a boost to cantrip damage while the average Arcane caster doesn't is for the exact same reason Clerics have traditionally had better martial capabilities than the average Arcane caster: because Arcane magic is more offensively-oriented than Divine magic. Wizards and Sorcerers will typically use their spell slots on enemies, while Clerics will more often need their spell slots for supportive spells and thus get better "basic" attacks.
I get the corollary between basic martial attacks and basic cantrip attacks but you are basically saying because mages are more offensively oriented they should be worse at offense than the cleric with the spells they will cast most often for most of the game. It can work out in these one encounter a day tables after like level 2-3 or so but if you are doing 2-3 encounters a day apparently with no short rests as no one does those supposedly mages will be casting cantrips as their main attack for much of the game given most games end at like level 10. And so for most of the game the offensively oriented arcane people are worse than the support guys at casting the most common attack spells. That does not feel right to me. I don't think either should get it, a full casters basic attacks should suck whether they are marital or spells. You have nine levels of spells have at least one flaw. I'd be fine with ranger/paladins getting it at some point as their cantrips should stack more closely with martial attacks and the logic could be these are attack spells and while they are worse casters they are better attackers than mages or clerics/druids.
Did anyone else notice this bit about Arcane Trickster?
DESIGN NOTE: ARCANE TRICKSTER UPDATES Here are the main updates in this subclass since the 2014 Player’s Handbook: • Spellcasting now uses the Arcane spell list rather than the Wizard list, and there is no school-of magic restriction after 3rd level. Moreover, the Rogue can now change one cantrip when gaining a level, and the Rogue can use an Arcane Focus.
Yes, and I'm not sure I like it. I liked the idea using both spell list and spell school as limiters. I liked the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight being limited to specific schools, with a couple of chances to dip outside those schools as they level up. I liked when they did it in the playtests too, excluding Rangers from Evocation and limiting the schools Bards could choose from by default. With the Bards especially, it feels like they're almost giving up on trying to find the right combination of spell lists and spell schools that would be appropriate and just said "heck with it, Bards can have ALL THE SPELLS!", which doesn't feel right to me.
Weapon mastery seems neat and looks like it's introducing a few interesting decisions, at least for Monks.
Weapons feeling distinct for 'specialized' characters while still being usable for non-specialized characters is great, and Fighters leaning even harder into that distinction by being able to customize their weapons is cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If the wand isn't casting a spell I guess? If its casting a spell the normal spell restrictions would apply.
I was one of those comments, standardized progressions just make so much sense as it opens up the subclass design beautifully. We can get cross-class subclasses, prestige subclasses etc.
If the concern is subclasses that don't get enough features like bard, just give them extra low-level ones. Or let them take an extra 1st-level feat as the missing feature.
Ultimately I ca live with the 2014 progressions as long as subclass acquisition is standardized at 3rd, but damn is it still the worst of both worlds.
I have to say that this UA has disappointed me a lot. I see a lot of things that are just going back to what they were in 2014, but with little changes. If that's going to be the way, I don't think I'm going to have the need to buy the new books.
If I buy the books it is to have a fresh start.
There are things I like, of course. Like for example what they have done with the Rogue. But overall it's a disappointing UA.
And Martial Weapons. So full armor and weapons for any caster with only 1 Cleric level.
Rogue Cunning Strike overpowered. They set all the costs 1d6 to be fixed by testers obviously. And the Poison is like a joke only requiring to have the tools, even if you have no idea how to use them (proficiency should be required). The Withdraw should cost half (rounding down) your dice and with the cunning action you can totally avoid any attack against you with a hit-and-run tactic. As summary, each one should have a requisite not clear to me at this moment. And because all of this, I can't understand yet why any Rogue should close to the target if can do the same at safe distance with ranged attacks with no penalty for its Sneak Attack.
In the other hand, Cunning Action should give dash and hide both at once, for you to reposition.
Correct me if I am wrong, so ANY Cleric adds its Wis to cantrips damage, but any other like Sorcerer or Wizard not?
Must be a joke, if that is at final, I’ll apply it to everyone. Stop that favoring Clerics so much by the face please.
They get the Blessed Strikes feature at Level 7. They can choose. EITHER Divine Strike where they can add 1d8 Radiant/Necrotic damage to a weapon attack once per turn, OR Potent Spellcasting where they can add their Wisdom modifier to the damage rolls of Divine cantrips, which will average out to about the same amount of damage.
I was looking forward to see the monk, and I'm disappointed.
Yes, they addressed the low damage by increasing the die (ironically, College of Dance gets unarmed damage die increase sooner), and separated unarmed damage from weapons. But unarmed fighting has no alternatives to weapon masteries. Only Open Hand subclass gets it. Grapple and shove depend on Str, and there's no adjustment for these options to work with Dex for monks.
Monk's baseline survivability is exactly where it was. Same HP and AC. The monk is still just as squishy. For some reason, a warrior in pursuit of absolute physical perfection doesn't even match fighter or ranger in vitality. They have Deflect Energy, Self-Restoration, and Disciplined Survivor going on for them, but that doesn't even come close to 3,5e monk with their immunities and magic resistance that made spells fail against the monk in roughly 50% of cases.
Resource starvation has been band-aided by Heightened Metabolism, that comes online only at level 7. It's a crutch, not a solution. Why not just start with 6 or 10 discipline points and gain an additional point every other level?
Overall, if you want to play as an unarmed, unarmored combatant, you're way better off playing a College of Dance bard. Same damage, same HP and AC, only you're a full caster of any spell list. I just don't understand WotC's irrational fear of making monks strong, they are consistently subpar in every edition.
And why other caster classes like Sorcerer or Wizard cannot enhance their cantrips? Not fair at all. If it would be a specific Cleric subclass specialized would be OK, but for all the Clerics as base class feature? No way.
But isnt that why they are different classes though? Wizards and Sorcs get to do things Clerics cant and clerics, amongst other things, get to enhance their cantrips. Not saying your concern is not valid, perhaps all cantrips should add a modifier, but I dont think theres an inherent problem with one caster getting it where others do not.
Maybe it's because some arcane cantrips compared to clerics tend to be somewhat more powerful in terms of damage?
I wish they had included the Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard ... even if they didn't have adjustments since the last UA, having the extra subclasses would have been nice.
And I wish they had stuck with the unified/normalized subclass levels across all classes.
Bard: hate that you cant get healing and illusion enchantment stuff on the same bard until level 10: my original solve was enchantment,transmutation, illusion and divination from arcane with necromancy and abjuration from primal.
Cleric: step in the right direction, want a different domain than war. I would prefer storms. Also dont want them to have mastery unless we give more to all the warrior classes.
Druid: the health and AC thing from wildshape needs to be baseline. The class is set up in a way that suggests wild shape focus or caster focus are both allowed for all of the subclasses. Dont want a hexblade situation where choosing the wild shape (pact of blade) is a trap for everyone except one subclass.
Monk: nerfs + buffs in a place where more classes are seeing buffs. Acrobatic movement is too late to make a real difference as is the metabolism ability. Level 10 defenses are solid though with near immunity to many of the most common effects. Still needs help. Monk dex Unarmed not working for grapple or shove is a massive oversight.
Paladin: give them back the cantrips and remove mastery, if not warrior classes need something to make them special.
Ranger: give them cantrips and remove mastery if not warrior classes need something to make them special. Deft explorer is worst of both worlds between expertise and natural explorer. Hunter's mark should lose concentration when upcast.
Rogue: excellent no notes please release as is.
For Monk, start with the Fighter chassis.
A d10 dice, 2 extra ASIs, a fighting style, second wind, action surge, two lots of extra attack.
Then give it the Monk features.
Sacred Flame d8 of a very reliable damage type, effective against vampire regen. Toll the Dead, the exact same than Arcane.
What you have more in Arcane is diversity, but you could remove most of them if we focus on effectiveness, they are more for having options to fit into themed character, but not really required for mechanics.
Giving ability modifiers bonus is a huge advantage for cantrips, so cannot think why the Cleric, not "some Cleric", but "all Cleric", must be the best cantrip attacker.
The previous version of the ability was fine, the extra d8 for melee attacks, OK is balanced and you got in danger at melee. But the version for cantrips is a huge improvement over others for free. It's simply not fair for the other classes, with cantrips as their base attack method.
Notice that I already was thinking about adding it reducing the damage die for balance, but avoiding the disappointment of rolling 1's.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/homebrew-house-rules/174798-cantrips-and-ability-score-bonus
They directly gave the best of the best to only one class, creating a huge gap between their round-by-round magic base attack.
Frankly, I think that paladin and ranger could use a choice between cantrips and weapon masteries, as well as features that use their Cha/Wis more effectively. So that when you pick a holy warrior class, you could choose whether you're more holy or more warrior, and as a ranger, whether you're more primal or more commando.
But the healing is not even an option for Arcane, so I see no reason or anything to compensate. Divine has really good damage spells, or there is someone not thinking that Spirit Guardians is an amazing spell? (depending the case even better than Arcane, and the Arcane don't have that option of damage during time at level 3).
In the other hand, spells are limited, cantrips are unlimited. Subtract the spells used for utility and etc...
Then, if we have to "compensate" Clerics in damage because spells, we should compensate Arcane to heal and getting armor?
I'd like the old version applied to melee, related precisely as Clerics get some martial proficiency like armor/shields. The current one is terrible.
Blessed Strikes really does seem like a weird holdover from 2014, when subclasses differentiated themselves by either giving Potent Spellcasting or Divine Strike. Even if it wasn't a very well-designed feature, it made more sense than the current version. I'd prefer something new, instead of yet another vestige of 2014 which lacks real purpose.
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 get the corollary between basic martial attacks and basic cantrip attacks but you are basically saying because mages are more offensively oriented they should be worse at offense than the cleric with the spells they will cast most often for most of the game. It can work out in these one encounter a day tables after like level 2-3 or so but if you are doing 2-3 encounters a day apparently with no short rests as no one does those supposedly mages will be casting cantrips as their main attack for much of the game given most games end at like level 10. And so for most of the game the offensively oriented arcane people are worse than the support guys at casting the most common attack spells. That does not feel right to me. I don't think either should get it, a full casters basic attacks should suck whether they are marital or spells. You have nine levels of spells have at least one flaw. I'd be fine with ranger/paladins getting it at some point as their cantrips should stack more closely with martial attacks and the logic could be these are attack spells and while they are worse casters they are better attackers than mages or clerics/druids.
Yes, and I'm not sure I like it. I liked the idea using both spell list and spell school as limiters. I liked the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight being limited to specific schools, with a couple of chances to dip outside those schools as they level up. I liked when they did it in the playtests too, excluding Rangers from Evocation and limiting the schools Bards could choose from by default. With the Bards especially, it feels like they're almost giving up on trying to find the right combination of spell lists and spell schools that would be appropriate and just said "heck with it, Bards can have ALL THE SPELLS!", which doesn't feel right to me.
Weapon mastery seems neat and looks like it's introducing a few interesting decisions, at least for Monks.
Weapons feeling distinct for 'specialized' characters while still being usable for non-specialized characters is great, and Fighters leaning even harder into that distinction by being able to customize their weapons is cool.