1) Confirmation this was the last PHB UA, however there will be further iteration internally.
2) Everything in it scored 70s or higher.
3) Druid and Moon Druid scored 70s, Barbarian and World Tree scored 80s, Monk scored 90s and is now "most improved" class ahead of the Ranger.
4) New healing spells scored 80s. The new Conjure spells scored 70s/80s.
5) The May release date leaked during PAX Unplugged was never true and surprised Crawford when he saw it. The books will still be getting worked on in May.
6) Future UAs may get released to test things like the new encounter builder but nothing to announce at this time.
Does this mean Magic Initiate can pick ANY Arcane / Primal / Devine magic spell with the ability to choose what stat to use for spell casting?
Cleric able to pick 2 Cantrips and 1 1st level spell from ARCANE list and use WIS to cast them. (Not class list but Magic source list)
they are still changing and testing things, they just won't be taking more UA style feedback on PHB things. Its going to be internal tests and design changes from here on out. Or at least thats the current plan.
Does this mean Magic Initiate can pick ANY Arcane / Primal / Devine magic spell with the ability to choose what stat to use for spell casting?
Cleric able to pick 2 Cantrips and 1 1st level spell from ARCANE list and use WIS to cast them. (Not class list but Magic source list)
No more public playtests != no more changes (and they even explicitly say this.) I expect Magic Initiate will go back to being class spell lists, but will retain the ability to choose your casting stat like modern feats have done (for recent examples, see Rune Shaper from Bigby's and Scion of the Outer Planes from Planescape.)
As for clerics being able to cast arcane spells with Wis... again, even putting aside the plethora of recent feats that already let them do this, domain spells work this way too. It's nothing new to 5e. What's one more?
Does this mean Magic Initiate can pick ANY Arcane / Primal / Devine magic spell with the ability to choose what stat to use for spell casting?
Cleric able to pick 2 Cantrips and 1 1st level spell from ARCANE list and use WIS to cast them. (Not class list but Magic source list)
No more public playtests != no more changes (and they even explicitly say this.) I expect Magic Initiate will go back to being class spell lists, but will retain the ability to choose your casting stat like modern feats have done (for recent examples, see Rune Shaper from Bigby's and Scion of the Outer Planes from Planescape.)
As for clerics being able to cast arcane spells with Wis... again, even putting aside the plethora of recent feats that already let them do this, domain spells work this way too. It's nothing new to 5e. What's one more?
they may also keep arcane spell lists etc for certain things, or organization. Selecting from a class list is especially annoying for a thing like magic initiate. That said, they probably will revert, because using both class lists, arcane/primal/divine lists/school lists may also cause organizational issues.
honestly I think primal/divine/arcane lists with certain class exclusives was the way to go, but I don't main casters, so its on them.
Personally I still think magic initiate should stick with casting stat; the entire point is that you’re dabbling in casting as whatever class you pick. It should also give use of foci so it’s a back door option for Divine or Arcane Bastion facilities, the same way Fighting Style feats are for Martial facilities (I assume the “Warrior Group only” pre-req on them was dropped with the codified concept of class groups).
And RIP being able to play a real Conjurer going forward, I guess. How is it that when we’ve literally got the best support for referencing a creature block, people can’t bear to bookmark or print a webpage? Multi-summons are probably more trouble than they’re worth, but we’ve already got standardized options for people who want to keep it simple; and they add insult to injury within the new “conjure” spells. I have no objection to their effects existing in principle, but telling us to pretend we’re actually summoning and commanding creatures with them instead of actually letting us summon and command creatures is just a really bad feeling. Though I’m sure plenty of people will be eager to call me a power gamer or grognard or whatever for enjoying the option existing.
Personally I still think magic initiate should stick with casting stat; the entire point is that you’re dabbling in casting as whatever class you pick. It should also give use of foci so it’s a back door option for Divine or Arcane Bastion facilities, the same way Fighting Style feats are for Martial facilities (I assume the “Warrior Group only” pre-req on them was dropped with the codified concept of class groups).
And RIP being able to play a real Conjurer going forward, I guess. How is it that when we’ve literally got the best support for referencing a creature block, people can’t bear to bookmark or print a webpage? Multi-summons are probably more trouble than they’re worth, but we’ve already got standardized options for people who want to keep it simple; and they add insult to injury within the new “conjure” spells. I have no objection to their effects existing in principle, but telling us to pretend we’re actually summoning and commanding creatures with them instead of actually letting us summon and command creatures is just a really bad feeling. Though I’m sure plenty of people will be eager to call me a power gamer or grognard or whatever for enjoying the option existing.
I think the old method was closer to the concept, but the concept was annoying to run for a lot of People in actual play. The new one knows its sacrificing that for being more playable.
Thank you very much for the summary, since otherwise it would have been difficult for me to understand because English is not my strong point.
F that it was the last PHB UA, since I expected there to be a UA9 only with spells, including some high level ones like Wish or True Polymorph.
Regarding the Conjure spells, I hope that many have changes from the comments provided and the internal tests, obviously they needed to change, but some could have been left to invoke real Swarms, not something that simulated these but without being so.
I'm not going to call you anything for preferring the 2014 Conjure spells, I just ask that you acknowledge the legitimate reasons why the devs felt they needed to be replaced.
As for "actually summoning and commanding creatures," the Tasha Summons do let you do that, and with a lot less overhead.
I'm not going to call you anything for preferring the 2014 Conjure spells, I just ask that you acknowledge the legitimate reasons why the devs felt they needed to be replaced.
As for "actually summoning and commanding creatures," the Tasha Summons do let you do that, and with a lot less overhead.
The overhead on single summons is arguably less than Tasha’s once the options are organized for access, since the stats are fixed rather than need to be checked against spell level. And I’ve never objected to their existence, I appreciate what both bring to the table. Multi-summons are too clunky, but the Basic Rules already provide options for the Conjure spells, so the access barrier to the sheets is literally “someone in the group has access to the internet and a printer”, which I do not think is particularly high for most groups. Could stand to flesh out Celestials and Fey a little more, but I believe that’s already in the works.
Plus imo Tasha’s summons aren’t “actual creatures”; there’s a certain vibe to specifically calling up a Hag or particular flavor of Fiend or one of the Elementals that doesn’t include “Elemental” in the name that I don’t think a pet block can capture. Plus there’s the roleplay angle; the Conjure spells provide a mechanism for interacting with extra planar beings that gives the players control over the terms. Using something like Conjure Fey or the Fiend options in XGtE to try to call something up to barter for information or suchlike seems fitting, but not for the Tasha’s when the summon is in the pet zone. It’s just a tool I think should remain in the active kit.
You can certainly argue that the PHB conjure spells have less overhead than the Tasha summons, but I don't think the designers nor the majority of players would agree with you.
The Tasha Summons are most definitely actual creatures, as their statblocks prove. Their forms may be mutable, but mechanically, they are creatures in every way, and can be used as such both in and out of combat.
You can certainly argue that the PHB conjure spells have less overhead than the Tasha summons, but I don't think the designers nor the majority of players would agree with you.
The Tasha Summons are most definitely actual creatures, as their statblocks prove. Their forms may be mutable, but mechanically, they are creatures in every way, and can be used as such both in and out of combat.
I realize you technically can, but given that they’re perfectly obedient it doesn’t really fit to use them as sources of information or in-depth aid in the same way that conjuring up a creature that exists independent of a spell is. They’re minor beings, not something that lends itself to building an independent NPC around.
You can certainly argue that the PHB conjure spells have less overhead than the Tasha summons, but I don't think the designers nor the majority of players would agree with you.
The Tasha Summons are most definitely actual creatures, as their statblocks prove. Their forms may be mutable, but mechanically, they are creatures in every way, and can be used as such both in and out of combat.
I realize you technically can, but given that they’re perfectly obedient it doesn’t really fit to use them as sources of information or in-depth aid in the same way that conjuring up a creature that exists independent of a spell is. They’re minor beings, not something that lends itself to building an independent NPC around.
1) Aren't casters powerful enough as it is, without effectively bundling free divinations into their summoning spells?
2) If your DM wants to, the Tasha summons can still be used in the way you describe. The spirits that the summon spell attracts to the caster do come from those planes of origin - Summon Fey is explicitly a fey spirit, Summon Celestial is explicitly a celestial spirit etc. If the party, say, lands in the Feywild and the DM would have been okay with Conjure Fey giving them a tour guide, they can do the same for Summon Fey too, provided someone in the party can understand Sylvan.
The point is that it’s not supposed to be free; it’s a mechanism for something like the classic summoning scenes where you call something up in a circle and try to get information from it. And my point is that while the DM is of course free to interpret the Tasha’s summons however they want, they are expressly and completely subordinate to the player, and so they would really be free divination. The entire point of using Conjure as the mechanism for this is to involve a degree of risk and uncertainty.
Looks appropriate. I only completed the survey for the Monk. The only things I remember criticizing were the Stun and Quivering Palm. I thought Stun was fine and that the reduction to 0 should have been the failure to save. An equivalent to the new Power Word Kill.
Tasha Summons are subordinate to the player, but they also invoke a themed spirit rather than a true extraplanar NPC, so what it knows and doesn't know is more credibly up to the DM to determine. If a player uses Summon Fiend instead of Summon Greater Demon, the DM doesn't have to worry about what information or relationships a Cambion or Barlgura or whatever might be expected to have - all they have to ask the player is "Devil, Demon, or Yugoloth?" + what it looks like and everything else about it is up to them.
Well, the Monk is officially dead. Everyone who loved playing the class in 5e can all go **** themselves because a bunch of brain-damaged anime-obsessed neanderthals spammed and harassed the creators until the creators kissed their manbaby asses.
Thank you for that constructive and objective critique.
So, since this was something I was interested in but don’t remember hearing any interview stuff for, did they ever say anything about how Bastions were received?
So, since this was something I was interested in but don’t remember hearing any interview stuff for, did they ever say anything about how Bastions were received?
nope. I think they will tackle those and the cantrips close or at introduction of the next DMG UA as bastions where officially the first DMG UA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Woohoo, news!
1) Confirmation this was the last PHB UA, however there will be further iteration internally.
2) Everything in it scored 70s or higher.
3) Druid and Moon Druid scored 70s, Barbarian and World Tree scored 80s, Monk scored 90s and is now "most improved" class ahead of the Ranger.
4) New healing spells scored 80s. The new Conjure spells scored 70s/80s.
5) The May release date leaked during PAX Unplugged was never true and surprised Crawford when he saw it. The books will still be getting worked on in May.
6) Future UAs may get released to test things like the new encounter builder but nothing to announce at this time.
No more Play tests?
Does this mean Magic Initiate can pick ANY Arcane / Primal / Devine magic spell with the ability to choose what stat to use for spell casting?
Cleric able to pick 2 Cantrips and 1 1st level spell from ARCANE list and use WIS to cast them. (Not class list but Magic source list)
they are still changing and testing things, they just won't be taking more UA style feedback on PHB things. Its going to be internal tests and design changes from here on out. Or at least thats the current plan.
They did say further internal revisions. So we probably won’t see how that gets resolved until the new PHB is published.
No more public playtests != no more changes (and they even explicitly say this.) I expect Magic Initiate will go back to being class spell lists, but will retain the ability to choose your casting stat like modern feats have done (for recent examples, see Rune Shaper from Bigby's and Scion of the Outer Planes from Planescape.)
As for clerics being able to cast arcane spells with Wis... again, even putting aside the plethora of recent feats that already let them do this, domain spells work this way too. It's nothing new to 5e. What's one more?
they may also keep arcane spell lists etc for certain things, or organization. Selecting from a class list is especially annoying for a thing like magic initiate. That said, they probably will revert, because using both class lists, arcane/primal/divine lists/school lists may also cause organizational issues.
honestly I think primal/divine/arcane lists with certain class exclusives was the way to go, but I don't main casters, so its on them.
Personally I still think magic initiate should stick with casting stat; the entire point is that you’re dabbling in casting as whatever class you pick. It should also give use of foci so it’s a back door option for Divine or Arcane Bastion facilities, the same way Fighting Style feats are for Martial facilities (I assume the “Warrior Group only” pre-req on them was dropped with the codified concept of class groups).
And RIP being able to play a real Conjurer going forward, I guess. How is it that when we’ve literally got the best support for referencing a creature block, people can’t bear to bookmark or print a webpage? Multi-summons are probably more trouble than they’re worth, but we’ve already got standardized options for people who want to keep it simple; and they add insult to injury within the new “conjure” spells. I have no objection to their effects existing in principle, but telling us to pretend we’re actually summoning and commanding creatures with them instead of actually letting us summon and command creatures is just a really bad feeling. Though I’m sure plenty of people will be eager to call me a power gamer or grognard or whatever for enjoying the option existing.
I think the old method was closer to the concept, but the concept was annoying to run for a lot of People in actual play. The new one knows its sacrificing that for being more playable.
Thank you very much for the summary, since otherwise it would have been difficult for me to understand because English is not my strong point.
F that it was the last PHB UA, since I expected there to be a UA9 only with spells, including some high level ones like Wish or True Polymorph.
Regarding the Conjure spells, I hope that many have changes from the comments provided and the internal tests, obviously they needed to change, but some could have been left to invoke real Swarms, not something that simulated these but without being so.
I'm not going to call you anything for preferring the 2014 Conjure spells, I just ask that you acknowledge the legitimate reasons why the devs felt they needed to be replaced.
As for "actually summoning and commanding creatures," the Tasha Summons do let you do that, and with a lot less overhead.
The overhead on single summons is arguably less than Tasha’s once the options are organized for access, since the stats are fixed rather than need to be checked against spell level. And I’ve never objected to their existence, I appreciate what both bring to the table. Multi-summons are too clunky, but the Basic Rules already provide options for the Conjure spells, so the access barrier to the sheets is literally “someone in the group has access to the internet and a printer”, which I do not think is particularly high for most groups. Could stand to flesh out Celestials and Fey a little more, but I believe that’s already in the works.
Plus imo Tasha’s summons aren’t “actual creatures”; there’s a certain vibe to specifically calling up a Hag or particular flavor of Fiend or one of the Elementals that doesn’t include “Elemental” in the name that I don’t think a pet block can capture. Plus there’s the roleplay angle; the Conjure spells provide a mechanism for interacting with extra planar beings that gives the players control over the terms. Using something like Conjure Fey or the Fiend options in XGtE to try to call something up to barter for information or suchlike seems fitting, but not for the Tasha’s when the summon is in the pet zone. It’s just a tool I think should remain in the active kit.
You can certainly argue that the PHB conjure spells have less overhead than the Tasha summons, but I don't think the designers nor the majority of players would agree with you.
The Tasha Summons are most definitely actual creatures, as their statblocks prove. Their forms may be mutable, but mechanically, they are creatures in every way, and can be used as such both in and out of combat.
I realize you technically can, but given that they’re perfectly obedient it doesn’t really fit to use them as sources of information or in-depth aid in the same way that conjuring up a creature that exists independent of a spell is. They’re minor beings, not something that lends itself to building an independent NPC around.
1) Aren't casters powerful enough as it is, without effectively bundling free divinations into their summoning spells?
2) If your DM wants to, the Tasha summons can still be used in the way you describe. The spirits that the summon spell attracts to the caster do come from those planes of origin - Summon Fey is explicitly a fey spirit, Summon Celestial is explicitly a celestial spirit etc. If the party, say, lands in the Feywild and the DM would have been okay with Conjure Fey giving them a tour guide, they can do the same for Summon Fey too, provided someone in the party can understand Sylvan.
The point is that it’s not supposed to be free; it’s a mechanism for something like the classic summoning scenes where you call something up in a circle and try to get information from it. And my point is that while the DM is of course free to interpret the Tasha’s summons however they want, they are expressly and completely subordinate to the player, and so they would really be free divination. The entire point of using Conjure as the mechanism for this is to involve a degree of risk and uncertainty.
Looks appropriate. I only completed the survey for the Monk. The only things I remember criticizing were the Stun and Quivering Palm. I thought Stun was fine and that the reduction to 0 should have been the failure to save. An equivalent to the new Power Word Kill.
Tasha Summons are subordinate to the player, but they also invoke a themed spirit rather than a true extraplanar NPC, so what it knows and doesn't know is more credibly up to the DM to determine. If a player uses Summon Fiend instead of Summon Greater Demon, the DM doesn't have to worry about what information or relationships a Cambion or Barlgura or whatever might be expected to have - all they have to ask the player is "Devil, Demon, or Yugoloth?" + what it looks like and everything else about it is up to them.
Thank you for that constructive and objective critique.
So, since this was something I was interested in but don’t remember hearing any interview stuff for, did they ever say anything about how Bastions were received?
nope. I think they will tackle those and the cantrips close or at introduction of the next DMG UA as bastions where officially the first DMG UA.