Yeah, it all depends. Right now the campaign I'm running has been through 2 different terrain types thus far, but it all depends on what the party decides to do.
Been playing a Variant Ranger and I gotta say, it feels amazing to be able to use stuff like zephyr strike to duck out of a sticky spot while still doing damage, or entangling strike when you need a guy locked up, and not have to worry about hunters mark concentration. Haven't had a shot to use primal awareness yet but it looks pretty great too. Deft explorer also just makes everything about the ranger feel better to me - flavor wise it feels roughly equivalent to Natural explorer but it feels more obvious, more noticeable. Not necessarily more powerful (Deft and Natural turn up in very different situations, and I've seen Natural kinda break campaigns like nothing else can that early) but its impact feels more immediately obvious, and a little more consistent.
Not sure if I'm missing something, or if the functionality of the Druid "Wild Companion" feels a bit off.
It says you can burn a wild shape to cast the Find Familiar spell without material components, but it doesn't get you out of the 1 hour casting time. So as a 2nd level druid (just for example) I can burn a wild shape slot and an HOUR of casting time to get a familiar to help me for an hour before it poofs away? Do I have that right?
The limited duration I get, but it really hampers the mechanical usefulness of the ability, given you have to sink so much time into casting the spell. Find Familiar feels like it was written to only have to be cast sparingly (on death or shape change), so having the druid be forced to eat that 1 hour cast time (possibly twice per short rest) because of it's limited duration feels punitive.
Not sure if I'm missing something, or if the functionality of the Druid "Wild Companion" feels a bit off.
It says you can burn a wild shape to cast the Find Familiar spell without material components, but it doesn't get you out of the 1 hour casting time. So as a 2nd level druid (just for example) I can burn a wild shape slot and an HOUR of casting time to get a familiar to help me for an hour before it poofs away? Do I have that right?
The limited duration I get, but it really hampers the mechanical usefulness of the ability, given you have to sink so much time into casting the spell. Find Familiar feels like it was written to only have to be cast sparingly (on death or shape change), so having the druid be forced to eat that 1 hour cast time (possibly twice per short rest) because of it's limited duration feels punitive.
Pretty sure that was an oversight in the design. Logic would say they meant to let you cast it like wild shape but use the rules in the spell for everything past casting it. That or they left the hour cast time in to prevent cheeky owl flyby help every single combat.
Edit: Reread it and it absolutely says "as an action you expend one use of wild shape to cast find familiar" so no it only costs an action not an hour.
"Cast Find Familiar" would generally mean expending the one hour of casting time.
While this is definitely obnoxious, I feel like the intent is to make the familiar a specific tool. Remember, this allows the druid to bypass the level requirements for flying forms in their own Wild Shape; they can create a raven or owl familiar at level 2, freely. The one-hour cast time may be intended as a means of limiting shenanigans that can be had with a costless Familiar spell.
If I were designing the feature I'd probably do something about it, but it's worth keeping in mind that this breaks a few different rules, and the time investment may be important for the feature. It's worth testing either way, methinks.
Not sure if I'm missing something, or if the functionality of the Druid "Wild Companion" feels a bit off.
It says you can burn a wild shape to cast the Find Familiar spell without material components, but it doesn't get you out of the 1 hour casting time. So as a 2nd level druid (just for example) I can burn a wild shape slot and an HOUR of casting time to get a familiar to help me for an hour before it poofs away? Do I have that right?
The limited duration I get, but it really hampers the mechanical usefulness of the ability, given you have to sink so much time into casting the spell. Find Familiar feels like it was written to only have to be cast sparingly (on death or shape change), so having the druid be forced to eat that 1 hour cast time (possibly twice per short rest) because of it's limited duration feels punitive.
Wild Companion 2nd-level druid feature (enhances Wild Shape) You gain the ability to summon a spirit that assumes an animal form: as an action, you can expend a use of your Wild Shape feature to cast the find familiar spell, without material components.
When you cast the spell in this way, the familiar is a fey instead of a beast, and the familiar disappears after a number of hours equal to half your druid level.
Is this recent UA stuff available on DND Beyond yet? I don't see options for it on the character creator even with Playtest Content turned on, and its been longer then a week since its release. I was wondering if this was going be available in the character builder at some point
Is this recent UA stuff available on DND Beyond yet? I don't see options for it on the character creator even with Playtest Content turned on, and its been longer then a week since its release. I was wondering if this was going be available in the character builder at some point
There's no need to be nasty to people. If you are annoyed, just don't answer. These kind of questions will /never/ go away so just accept it and move forward.
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.
There's no need to be nasty to people. If you are annoyed, just don't answer. These kind of questions will /never/ go away so just accept it and move forward.
i think the overall idea of new options is good, but I am not sure I agree with what they focus on and making sure to broaden classes while not making them blander.
A few comments: *Spell less ranger option is a lot more needed, it could grant unlimited hunters mark, and +1d6 damage every time you would otherwise gain access to a new spell level.
*Spell less paladin, instead enhanced lay on hands and smite. Spells are loosing their cool when absolutely every character toss them around.
*Find familiar and Find greater steed should be added to ranger and druid spell lists
*If you gain the Extra attack twice from different classes, you should instead gain an ability increase/feat. Losing out on a major ability disincentivise multi-classing two fighting classes beyond 4class A/5+ class B too hard.
*Monk should be able to pick any weapon as a monk weapon, makes for fun builds and multi classes.
*Dont allow changing of spells. It rocks the core of certain classes.
*Give rogue option of dealing sneak attack with spells, and sneak attack with unarmed strikes (ninja) by giving up something, for example thives cant...
*Allow applyikg poison as a bonus action with cunning action.
*Dont allow Fighting styles that give out-of-combat uses. It steps on other classes. Thats what multi classing is for, and its not a combat style to be good at talking.
That would be great if that's the case. As I don't think that's called out anywhere though I'm gonna just hope that the final version of this makes that more explicit ("...use of your Wild Shape feature to cast the find familiar spell, ignoring the casting time and material components" or something like that).
That would be great if that's the case. As I don't think that's called out anywhere though I'm gonna just hope that the final version of this makes that more explicit ("...use of your Wild Shape feature to cast the find familiar spell, ignoring the casting time and material components" or something like that).
I'm really not sure how they could make it any more explicit than saying "as an action."
But I'm happy to re-phrase: What is bad about the known-spells casters being able to switch out one spell per long rest with one spell of equal level?
The feature of switching out spells for those casters is already in the game when they level up. They then can even swap out different levels between one spell per level up.
Prepared-spells casters still can change their full arsenal per long rest, and have access to larger spell lists. I do not think that they lose out on anything if their know-spells colleagues get a bit more flexibility.
Imagine your campaign has the direction of confronting frost giants. The sorcerer in the group is all decked out in fire damage spells. Now the focus shifts to fire giants and the sorcerer is basically useless. Wouldn't it be a good feature to have him switch out a few spells during the group's travel to the fire giants domain?
What is the negative effect of allowing spell versatility? What is it that "rocks the core of other classes"?
Really, I am asking, I want to know. If there is anything that makes this a bad feature, I want to know. I have not been able to imagine anything so far myself.
Well your example is good. While the sorcerer in question was built to excell against frost giants he suddenly excell against fire giants too, removing one of the class most obvious drawbacks, and in the process removing a wizards primary advantage.
it also takes away the logic behind how sorcerers gain spells. They are born with their powers, so how do you change them from day to day? Changing one spell on level up is a gradual slight change, but day-to-day changes is major.
Too me this change is much in line with the social maneuvers of the battlemaster. Its not like it makes a dramatic shift of power, but it makes little logic sense and steps on other classes abilities, which I find bad.
fof a sorcerer I would much rather allow they to ignore resistance or something else that makes them better at what they do than remove their class buildup.
Natural Explorer varies depending on the campaign you're in. If you're doing an entire campaign in the jungle or the Underdark, then Natural Explorer eliminates a lot of the danger posed by the environment. If you're doing a story of the week style, as a lot of my friends do, I could see why some people don't care much for the Ranger.
My first Ranger character started with woodlands and hills to match his background. 10 levels later he had not set foot in either.
Well your example is good. While the sorcerer in question was built to excell against frost giants he suddenly excell against fire giants too, removing one of the class most obvious drawbacks, and in the process removing a wizards primary advantage.
it also takes away the logic behind how sorcerers gain spells. They are born with their powers, so how do you change them from day to day? Changing one spell on level up is a gradual slight change, but day-to-day changes is major.
Too me this change is much in line with the social maneuvers of the battlemaster. Its not like it makes a dramatic shift of power, but it makes little logic sense and steps on other classes abilities, which I find bad.
fof a sorcerer I would much rather allow they to ignore resistance or something else that makes them better at what they do than remove their class buildup.
Very much agree. Sorcerers changing around their spells on LR makes no logical sense to the lore or mechanics of the character. Would much rather they introduce some sort of short rest SP recovery mechanic as a fun new enhancement to Sorcerer. I vote for a dice mechanic similar to hit dice. Maybe roll 1d4 for every 4 levels of Sorcerer and you recover that many SP. Sometimes you will get few and sometimes you will get alot. Feels in keeping with the power being based on your blood- sometimes you feel good and sometimes you don't. Most other classes get some recovery of key class abilities on a short rest whether its wild shape, arcane recovery, channel divinity, ki points, etc.
And if they wanted more spells, I would say give each subclass an already known spell list tied to the subclass. Sort of the innate spells that come from being that subclass itself. Then the learned spells could be those you unlock as you grow and learn to control your power.
Well your example is good. While the sorcerer in question was built to excell against frost giants he suddenly excell against fire giants too, removing one of the class most obvious drawbacks, and in the process removing a wizards primary advantage.
it also takes away the logic behind how sorcerers gain spells. They are born with their powers, so how do you change them from day to day? Changing one spell on level up is a gradual slight change, but day-to-day changes is major.
Too me this change is much in line with the social maneuvers of the battlemaster. Its not like it makes a dramatic shift of power, but it makes little logic sense and steps on other classes abilities, which I find bad.
fof a sorcerer I would much rather allow they to ignore resistance or something else that makes them better at what they do than remove their class buildup.
You're thinking of these features as 'competitive', they work significantly better if you think of them as 'Collaborative'.
A Wizard and a Bard/sorcerer at the same table are going to work together to maximize their collective arcane capabilities. Not against each other.
And if you don't have a wizard at your table, then what difference does it make that your Bard or Sorcerer can step into that role of the Utility Magic User.
As someone who has played Bard, Cleric, and Wizard I would have loved to have been able to let my teammates carry a bit of the 'niche spell' load so I could choose more of the spells I really wanted to cast but never found scrolls of.
Also, please keep in mind that these are Variant Rules. So you don't have to take them. So you don't have to comment on the 'concept' only the 'implementation', any issues with the 'concept' are covered by not allowing the variant..
Yeah, it all depends. Right now the campaign I'm running has been through 2 different terrain types thus far, but it all depends on what the party decides to do.
Been playing a Variant Ranger and I gotta say, it feels amazing to be able to use stuff like zephyr strike to duck out of a sticky spot while still doing damage, or entangling strike when you need a guy locked up, and not have to worry about hunters mark concentration. Haven't had a shot to use primal awareness yet but it looks pretty great too. Deft explorer also just makes everything about the ranger feel better to me - flavor wise it feels roughly equivalent to Natural explorer but it feels more obvious, more noticeable. Not necessarily more powerful (Deft and Natural turn up in very different situations, and I've seen Natural kinda break campaigns like nothing else can that early) but its impact feels more immediately obvious, and a little more consistent.
Not sure if I'm missing something, or if the functionality of the Druid "Wild Companion" feels a bit off.
It says you can burn a wild shape to cast the Find Familiar spell without material components, but it doesn't get you out of the 1 hour casting time. So as a 2nd level druid (just for example) I can burn a wild shape slot and an HOUR of casting time to get a familiar to help me for an hour before it poofs away? Do I have that right?
The limited duration I get, but it really hampers the mechanical usefulness of the ability, given you have to sink so much time into casting the spell. Find Familiar feels like it was written to only have to be cast sparingly (on death or shape change), so having the druid be forced to eat that 1 hour cast time (possibly twice per short rest) because of it's limited duration feels punitive.
Pretty sure that was an oversight in the design. Logic would say they meant to let you cast it like wild shape but use the rules in the spell for everything past casting it. That or they left the hour cast time in to prevent cheeky owl flyby help every single combat.
Edit: Reread it and it absolutely says "as an action you expend one use of wild shape to cast find familiar" so no it only costs an action not an hour.
"Cast Find Familiar" would generally mean expending the one hour of casting time.
While this is definitely obnoxious, I feel like the intent is to make the familiar a specific tool. Remember, this allows the druid to bypass the level requirements for flying forms in their own Wild Shape; they can create a raven or owl familiar at level 2, freely. The one-hour cast time may be intended as a means of limiting shenanigans that can be had with a costless Familiar spell.
If I were designing the feature I'd probably do something about it, but it's worth keeping in mind that this breaks a few different rules, and the time investment may be important for the feature. It's worth testing either way, methinks.
Please do not contact or message me.
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
Yeah, pretty sure the "as an action" clause means the spell is cast in that time instead of the regular casting time.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Is this recent UA stuff available on DND Beyond yet? I don't see options for it on the character creator even with Playtest Content turned on, and its been longer then a week since its release. I was wondering if this was going be available in the character builder at some point
Read Here Before Asking This Question For The Eighty Thousandth Time, Please
Please do not contact or message me.
There's no need to be nasty to people. If you are annoyed, just don't answer. These kind of questions will /never/ go away so just accept it and move forward.
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
Indeed.
Yeah sorry, I looked and didn't see anything about it, must have missed it, my bad. Thanks for the link though
i think the overall idea of new options is good, but I am not sure I agree with what they focus on and making sure to broaden classes while not making them blander.
A few comments:
*Spell less ranger option is a lot more needed, it could grant unlimited hunters mark, and +1d6 damage every time you would otherwise gain access to a new spell level.
*Spell less paladin, instead enhanced lay on hands and smite. Spells are loosing their cool when absolutely every character toss them around.
*Find familiar and Find greater steed should be added to ranger and druid spell lists
*If you gain the Extra attack twice from different classes, you should instead gain an ability increase/feat. Losing out on a major ability disincentivise multi-classing two fighting classes beyond 4class A/5+ class B too hard.
*Monk should be able to pick any weapon as a monk weapon, makes for fun builds and multi classes.
*Dont allow changing of spells. It rocks the core of certain classes.
*Give rogue option of dealing sneak attack with spells, and sneak attack with unarmed strikes (ninja) by giving up something, for example thives cant...
*Allow applyikg poison as a bonus action with cunning action.
*Dont allow Fighting styles that give out-of-combat uses. It steps on other classes. Thats what multi classing is for, and its not a combat style to be good at talking.
That would be great if that's the case. As I don't think that's called out anywhere though I'm gonna just hope that the final version of this makes that more explicit ("...use of your Wild Shape feature to cast the find familiar spell, ignoring the casting time and material components" or something like that).
I'm really not sure how they could make it any more explicit than saying "as an action."
You summoned me? ;)
For reference, I'm trying to find reasons, why spell versatility may be a bad thing. So far I did not come up with anything, and I have asked:
#1
#2
#3
#4
But I'm happy to re-phrase: What is bad about the known-spells casters being able to switch out one spell per long rest with one spell of equal level?
The feature of switching out spells for those casters is already in the game when they level up. They then can even swap out different levels between one spell per level up.
Prepared-spells casters still can change their full arsenal per long rest, and have access to larger spell lists. I do not think that they lose out on anything if their know-spells colleagues get a bit more flexibility.
Imagine your campaign has the direction of confronting frost giants. The sorcerer in the group is all decked out in fire damage spells. Now the focus shifts to fire giants and the sorcerer is basically useless. Wouldn't it be a good feature to have him switch out a few spells during the group's travel to the fire giants domain?
What is the negative effect of allowing spell versatility? What is it that "rocks the core of other classes"?
Really, I am asking, I want to know. If there is anything that makes this a bad feature, I want to know. I have not been able to imagine anything so far myself.
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
Well your example is good. While the sorcerer in question was built to excell against frost giants he suddenly excell against fire giants too, removing one of the class most obvious drawbacks, and in the process removing a wizards primary advantage.
it also takes away the logic behind how sorcerers gain spells. They are born with their powers, so how do you change them from day to day? Changing one spell on level up is a gradual slight change, but day-to-day changes is major.
Too me this change is much in line with the social maneuvers of the battlemaster. Its not like it makes a dramatic shift of power, but it makes little logic sense and steps on other classes abilities, which I find bad.
fof a sorcerer I would much rather allow they to ignore resistance or something else that makes them better at what they do than remove their class buildup.
My first Ranger character started with woodlands and hills to match his background. 10 levels later he had not set foot in either.
Very much agree. Sorcerers changing around their spells on LR makes no logical sense to the lore or mechanics of the character. Would much rather they introduce some sort of short rest SP recovery mechanic as a fun new enhancement to Sorcerer. I vote for a dice mechanic similar to hit dice. Maybe roll 1d4 for every 4 levels of Sorcerer and you recover that many SP. Sometimes you will get few and sometimes you will get alot. Feels in keeping with the power being based on your blood- sometimes you feel good and sometimes you don't. Most other classes get some recovery of key class abilities on a short rest whether its wild shape, arcane recovery, channel divinity, ki points, etc.
And if they wanted more spells, I would say give each subclass an already known spell list tied to the subclass. Sort of the innate spells that come from being that subclass itself. Then the learned spells could be those you unlock as you grow and learn to control your power.
You're thinking of these features as 'competitive', they work significantly better if you think of them as 'Collaborative'.
A Wizard and a Bard/sorcerer at the same table are going to work together to maximize their collective arcane capabilities. Not against each other.
And if you don't have a wizard at your table, then what difference does it make that your Bard or Sorcerer can step into that role of the Utility Magic User.
As someone who has played Bard, Cleric, and Wizard I would have loved to have been able to let my teammates carry a bit of the 'niche spell' load so I could choose more of the spells I really wanted to cast but never found scrolls of.
Also, please keep in mind that these are Variant Rules. So you don't have to take them. So you don't have to comment on the 'concept' only the 'implementation', any issues with the 'concept' are covered by not allowing the variant..