There's a small number of subclasses I don't recall seeing, but only one unknown
A number of them they didn't show any updates for, they just told us to use what's in the books already.
But yeah I think Fighter is the only one with a gap since they released Brawler and people didn't really seem to like it, though probably for a bunch of different reasons (some because 90% of its features were just to make unarmed barely comparable to using a weapon, others because it could be handled better with feats on top of other classes/sub-classes etc.).
I'm assuming they didn't think of all sub-classes required play-testing, as some probably only have very minor changes that they're already happy with – we were mostly seeing sub-classes with more significant changes being proposed for them.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
There's a small number of subclasses I don't recall seeing, but only one unknown
A number of them they didn't show any updates for, they just told us to use what's in the books already.
But yeah I think Fighter is the only one with a gap since they released Brawler and people didn't really seem to like it, though probably for a bunch of different reasons (some because 90% of its features were just to make unarmed barely comparable to using a weapon, others because it could be handled better with feats on top of other classes/sub-classes etc.).
I'm assuming they didn't think of all sub-classes required play-testing, as some probably only have very minor changes that they're already happy with – we were mostly seeing sub-classes with more significant changes being proposed for them.
The other issue with the brawler was the number of respondents practically yelling "Fix the monk first!!"
I think that comment was directed more towards the presence or absence of feats. They gave fairly large feat lists, some of which I do not think were changed, so my personal plan is to be pleasantly surprised if there is anything they have not listed. I am not letting myself have optimism that's unfounded.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I think that comment was directed more towards the presence or absence of feats. They gave fairly large feat lists, some of which I do not think were changed, so my personal plan is to be pleasantly surprised if there is anything they have not listed. I am not letting myself have optimism that's unfounded.
They did promise there will be feats and spells we haven't seen in the playtest yet, including ones that will be brand new to 5e. Whether one of those as-yet unreleased feats will be Eldritch Adept however remains to be seen however.
The other issue with the brawler was the number of respondents practically yelling "Fix the monk first!!"
To the extent that was a factor, they were right to. Between Glory Paladin, Beast Barbarian (hell, any Barb with TB or UF), Dance Bard, even Moon Druid, our cup runnethed-over with non-monk unarmed classes that all did a better job of 'monking' than the 2014 or UA6 monks managed to. So I could see WotC firing up the stove for yet another one with the Brawler while their flagship "puncher" continued to wither on the vine being a thorn in the side of respondents when they booted up the Brawler survey.
My point being that absence in the material we’ve seen isn’t positive proof that something won’t crop up
they basically said they are testing all major changes, and the sub classes that aren't in being tested are mostly to be tested as is.
So expect minimal changes to subclasses, probably just wording or made to work with existing features where that clashes.
The only real changes I expect to subclasses are to tweak them for rules changes, and to add bonus spells to the older sorcerer subclasses. If they don't then Clockwork Soul and Aberrant Mind will remain far and away the best 2. I also see some boosting to some of the weaker subclasses for each class - like the weaker feats mostly seem to have added a "+1 to stat" that wasn't there before. The goal seems to be to bring things in line towards a medium rather than have "must-haves" and "NEVER-take-that" options.
My point being that absence in the material we’ve seen isn’t positive proof that something won’t crop up
they basically said they are testing all major changes, and the sub classes that aren't in being tested are mostly to be tested as is.
So expect minimal changes to subclasses, probably just wording or made to work with existing features where that clashes.
The only real changes I expect to subclasses are to tweak them for rules changes, and to add bonus spells to the older sorcerer subclasses. If they don't then Clockwork Soul and Aberrant Mind will remain far and away the best 2. I also see some boosting to some of the weaker subclasses for each class - like the weaker feats mostly seem to have added a "+1 to stat" that wasn't there before. The goal seems to be to bring things in line towards a medium rather than have "must-haves" and "NEVER-take-that" options.
I meant they wouldn't be altering the ones they didnt test. The ones they tested are still up for grabs, though they implied changes they make will primarily be based on feedback from all versions of that sub.
I preferred the first draconic to the second, I liked the breath version of sorcerous burst mid level. But neither of them are great, and personally, I don't think adding spells is really the issue. First off, what do you add to draconic, who can be any element, and associated concepts that works for all if them(dragon types)? Similarly wild magic, has no specific theme that fits for the spells. And it would have to be enough spells for multiple levels.
I think they just need better, and more customized features, or they make new spells to fill those gaps.
I mean, Draconic Sorcerer isn't bad in UA 7; the 6th level feature synergizes well with Sorcerous Burst in the short term and resistance always scales for the long term, the 14th gives near unlimited flight, and the 18th level feature is a save or suck effect that only takes one Bonus Action to get moving. And both Sorcerous Burst and Arcane Eruption have enough wildcard elements to them that they can fit nicely as dragon magic or wild magic associated powers.
I meant they wouldn't be altering the ones they didnt test. The ones they tested are still up for grabs, though they implied changes they make will primarily be based on feedback from all versions of that sub.
It depends what you mean by altering; they said in one of the earlier videos that even once the UAs are done they'll still have balancing to do. This means that while the untested sub-classes are unlikely to see any major changes in how they function (the features they have are the features they'll have on release), but smaller tweaks to adjust damages, costs, number of uses etc. are still possible if they're deemed weaker compared to others.
UA content always tends to either be overpowered or a bit flawed in terms of wording, but with a lot of positivity on some of the changes I expect they won't want to nerf any of them too hard, so giving boosts to others to compensate seems possible.
Would be nice for them to do a video talking about their balancing phase though, even if it's just general thoughts and remarks on how they're doing, and picking out some classes/sub-classes they've identified so we know their thought process at least.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
My point being that absence in the material we’ve seen isn’t positive proof that something won’t crop up
they basically said they are testing all major changes, and the sub classes that aren't in being tested are mostly to be tested as is.
So expect minimal changes to subclasses, probably just wording or made to work with existing features where that clashes.
The only real changes I expect to subclasses are to tweak them for rules changes, and to add bonus spells to the older sorcerer subclasses. If they don't then Clockwork Soul and Aberrant Mind will remain far and away the best 2. I also see some boosting to some of the weaker subclasses for each class - like the weaker feats mostly seem to have added a "+1 to stat" that wasn't there before. The goal seems to be to bring things in line towards a medium rather than have "must-haves" and "NEVER-take-that" options.
I meant they wouldn't be altering the ones they didnt test. The ones they tested are still up for grabs, though they implied changes they make will primarily be based on feedback from all versions of that sub.
I preferred the first draconic to the second, I liked the breath version of sorcerous burst mid level. But neither of them are great, and personally, I don't think adding spells is really the issue. First off, what do you add to draconic, who can be any element, and associated concepts that works for all if them(dragon types)? Similarly wild magic, has no specific theme that fits for the spells. And it would have to be enough spells for multiple levels.
I think they just need better, and more customized features, or they make new spells to fill those gaps.
The big problem with the first draconic Sorcerer subclass was tying subclass abilities to bad spells, and even worse, bad spells that required concentration. That had to be one of the top 5 worst ideas they had in the entire playtest.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A number of them they didn't show any updates for, they just told us to use what's in the books already.
But yeah I think Fighter is the only one with a gap since they released Brawler and people didn't really seem to like it, though probably for a bunch of different reasons (some because 90% of its features were just to make unarmed barely comparable to using a weapon, others because it could be handled better with feats on top of other classes/sub-classes etc.).
I'm assuming they didn't think of all sub-classes required play-testing, as some probably only have very minor changes that they're already happy with – we were mostly seeing sub-classes with more significant changes being proposed for them.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
My point being that absence in the material we’ve seen isn’t positive proof that something won’t crop up
The other issue with the brawler was the number of respondents practically yelling "Fix the monk first!!"
they basically said they are testing all major changes, and the sub classes that aren't in being tested are mostly to be tested as is.
So expect minimal changes to subclasses, probably just wording or made to work with existing features where that clashes.
I think that comment was directed more towards the presence or absence of feats. They gave fairly large feat lists, some of which I do not think were changed, so my personal plan is to be pleasantly surprised if there is anything they have not listed. I am not letting myself have optimism that's unfounded.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
They did promise there will be feats and spells we haven't seen in the playtest yet, including ones that will be brand new to 5e. Whether one of those as-yet unreleased feats will be Eldritch Adept however remains to be seen however.
To the extent that was a factor, they were right to. Between Glory Paladin, Beast Barbarian (hell, any Barb with TB or UF), Dance Bard, even Moon Druid, our cup runnethed-over with non-monk unarmed classes that all did a better job of 'monking' than the 2014 or UA6 monks managed to. So I could see WotC firing up the stove for yet another one with the Brawler while their flagship "puncher" continued to wither on the vine being a thorn in the side of respondents when they booted up the Brawler survey.
The only real changes I expect to subclasses are to tweak them for rules changes, and to add bonus spells to the older sorcerer subclasses. If they don't then Clockwork Soul and Aberrant Mind will remain far and away the best 2. I also see some boosting to some of the weaker subclasses for each class - like the weaker feats mostly seem to have added a "+1 to stat" that wasn't there before. The goal seems to be to bring things in line towards a medium rather than have "must-haves" and "NEVER-take-that" options.
I meant they wouldn't be altering the ones they didnt test. The ones they tested are still up for grabs, though they implied changes they make will primarily be based on feedback from all versions of that sub.
I preferred the first draconic to the second, I liked the breath version of sorcerous burst mid level. But neither of them are great, and personally, I don't think adding spells is really the issue. First off, what do you add to draconic, who can be any element, and associated concepts that works for all if them(dragon types)? Similarly wild magic, has no specific theme that fits for the spells. And it would have to be enough spells for multiple levels.
I think they just need better, and more customized features, or they make new spells to fill those gaps.
I mean, Draconic Sorcerer isn't bad in UA 7; the 6th level feature synergizes well with Sorcerous Burst in the short term and resistance always scales for the long term, the 14th gives near unlimited flight, and the 18th level feature is a save or suck effect that only takes one Bonus Action to get moving. And both Sorcerous Burst and Arcane Eruption have enough wildcard elements to them that they can fit nicely as dragon magic or wild magic associated powers.
It depends what you mean by altering; they said in one of the earlier videos that even once the UAs are done they'll still have balancing to do. This means that while the untested sub-classes are unlikely to see any major changes in how they function (the features they have are the features they'll have on release), but smaller tweaks to adjust damages, costs, number of uses etc. are still possible if they're deemed weaker compared to others.
UA content always tends to either be overpowered or a bit flawed in terms of wording, but with a lot of positivity on some of the changes I expect they won't want to nerf any of them too hard, so giving boosts to others to compensate seems possible.
Would be nice for them to do a video talking about their balancing phase though, even if it's just general thoughts and remarks on how they're doing, and picking out some classes/sub-classes they've identified so we know their thought process at least.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The big problem with the first draconic Sorcerer subclass was tying subclass abilities to bad spells, and even worse, bad spells that required concentration. That had to be one of the top 5 worst ideas they had in the entire playtest.