A target can generally only be affected by a given ability once. I forget where the exact rule is, but if you generate a Hunter's Mark effect on a target, then try to Hunter's Mark it again, you would simply replace the existing mark, not double up on it.
Admittedly, the ranger's kind of needed Hunter's Mark to work like this for a long time, it's ridiculous that their 'class-defining' ability is a spell that conflicts with three quarters of their existing spell list, but no, you can't double Hunter's Mark.
You can, however, add Hex to it. Which is mostly just a straight-up better version of the same thing.
BUT does this mean you can have the spell Hunter's Mark and the ability Hunter's Mark up simultaneously on two different enemies?
I am extremely ambivalent about swapping cantrips. On the one hand, it's a very practical thing to do, especially for players who pick cantrips that they have long since outgrown. On the other hand, the idea of swapping out cantrips flies in the face of what cantrips are purported to be.
I am extremely ambivalent about swapping cantrips. On the one hand, it's a very practical thing to do, especially for players who pick cantrips that they have long since outgrown. On the other hand, the idea of swapping out cantrips flies in the face of what cantrips are purported to be.
I'm actually hoping this Spell Versatility thing is being lent to other classes from the Artificer, in Rising. It honestly makes a lot of sense for artificers.
Also? If anyone had any doubt left whatsoever that they have a huge character building sourcebook in the works? Maybe stop doubting that.
There is a lot to unpack in this update. Some things that in particular caught my fancy:
Survival Instincts could have been a path towards allowing pure-barbarian grapplers, but left Athletics off the list of skills. Instead... Rangers will now be the undisputed kings of grapple, by virtue of having expertise in Athletics and access to the Unarmed Fighting fighting style??? What a time to be alive!
Harness divine power is nice for clerics, and nice for Paladins. I think its a good ability, although it does make level 20 capstones like those of the Monk and Sorcerer now feel even more like something that should have come a long time earlier, but that's more a problem of those capstones and not with this ability being too strong.
Bait and Switch is the kind of thing that a whole archetype can be built around, such an amazingly good maneuver for a "defender" type! Cool to be able to play a defender fighter that doesn't need to be a cavalier.
Restraining Strike is probably too much, since it's just Ensnaring Strike but better in every way (your athletic check is very likely to be a bit higher than the Spell DC of a caster would be; doesn't require a spell slot only a refresh-on-short-rest maneuver dice; doesn't require concentration; gives grappled and restrained instead of just grappled). There is no situation in which you would choose to grapple when you could restraining strike instead, which seems like a poor design decision.
The new monk weapons is great and makes a ton of sense. There were a lot of concepts that were unnecessarily punished by strange design decisions like darts not being monk weapons.
Where to even start with the ranger? Literally everything about it is fun and good and makes me want to play one, which is such a new and strange feeling.
Where "natural explorer" gave you a bunch of abilities that many DMs would never give you an opportunity to use, "Deft Explorer" gives you a menu of fun abilities that will feel good to use without being too strong.
Favored Foe is great, since most ranger spells require concentration, and most ranger spells are a poorer use of a spell slot in an encounter than Hunter's Mark which creates a frustrating illusion of choice. However, letting you do this Wisdom mod/day overly incentivizes a one-level dip to pick this up, it should be once per short rest at 1st, up to twice/short at 6 and unlimited at 14.
Primal awareness makes more sense than primeval awareness, and replaces an ability that didn't really have very clear opportunities to shine
At last, beasts that make sense for the beast master :) What a delight.
The Rogue's new cunning action sounds useful, without being overpowered. Using a bonus and all of your move sounds like a pretty fair trade for advantage on a single attack. But on ranged rogues... this does kind of walk all over some of the Rogue subclasses like swashbuckler and inquisitive, that make a big deal about giving you a new way to get a sneak attack in without advantage or an adjacent ally.
The new warlock stuff seems fun, but warlocks are always fun. Eldritch Armor is nice, since it may lead to more pure-classed Hexblades instead of multiclassing being mandatory, but doesn't invalidate the need to spread some stats around to strength to wear heavy armor.Pact of the Talisman is cool, but its ability should be rephrased to "when the wearer makes a skill check that they do not add their proficiency bonus to" instead of "which they lack proficiency in," to avoid making warlock 1 a mandatory splash for bards.
The new fighting styles... awesome, especially the ones that aren't tied to a weapon choice. Thrown Weapon Fighting is MUCH NEEDED, because specializing in thrown weapons just simply was not viable without this (and even dual wielder couldn't keep up with the number of thrown attacks a fighter of even middling level could make).
Unarmed Fighting lets you do everything that "grappler" builds should always have been able to do, which is good. But it also makes you a better puncher than a level 10 monk, which is not necessary. Leaving it with Tavern Brawler damage dice (1d4) would be more than adequate.
Favored Foe goes too far. Its great for a straight Ranger but giving a non-concentration DPS boost as a level 1 class feature piles damage onto the more power-gamey multiclasses. Every assassin / gloomstalker / hexblade on the planet is drooling over this right now.
I am extremely ambivalent about swapping cantrips. On the one hand, it's a very practical thing to do, especially for players who pick cantrips that they have long since outgrown. On the other hand, the idea of swapping out cantrips flies in the face of what cantrips are purported to be.
I'm actually hoping this Spell Versatility thing is being lent to other classes from the Artificer, in Rising. It honestly makes a lot of sense for artificers.
Also? If anyone had any doubt left whatsoever that they have a huge character building sourcebook in the works? Maybe stop doubting that.
Yup. We've got a big one in the works, and my body is ready!
A target can generally only be affected by a given ability once. I forget where the exact rule is, but if you generate a Hunter's Mark effect on a target, then try to Hunter's Mark it again, you would simply replace the existing mark, not double up on it.
Admittedly, the ranger's kind of needed Hunter's Mark to work like this for a long time, it's ridiculous that their 'class-defining' ability is a spell that conflicts with three quarters of their existing spell list, but no, you can't double Hunter's Mark.
You can, however, add Hex to it. Which is mostly just a straight-up better version of the same thing.
BUT does this mean you can have the spell Hunter's Mark and the ability Hunter's Mark up simultaneously on two different enemies?
While I think the RAI is that the Hunter's Mark variant lacks concentration so that it doesn't interfere with the umpty dozen other Ranger spells that require concentration, there's nothing to stop you from casting all 5 of your variant Hunter's Marks (with a 20 WIS) plus a Hunter's Mark spell to cover six enemies at once. Why you would want to is not clear, other than some of the Hunter multiple-target attacks I suppose.
It does kind of show what an elegant solution concentration was, given how easy it is to screw with the game by removing it.
A dizzying array of options...many of which seem quite fun and practical.
I particularly enjoy that "Pact of the Talisman" for the Warlock...it essentially gives you the flexibility to create an object you can flavor to your character, one that has interesting uses should you use the Invocations.
It also makes you a more skillful character, potentially...or an ally.
Damn...this Unearthed Arcana is such an injection of fresh ideas.
I really like a lot of these, especially for the Cleric and Ranger. Cantrip and spell swapping I'm unsure about -- those have the potential to lose a core part of what makes certain classes the way they are, but they're useful for new players, and hell, they're optional.
However, with all of these being optional, and these largely being changes to core class features, I kind of doubt we're going to see them added to D&D Beyond. I find it more likely we're going to be told to homebrew these on our own until they're done revamping the character builder *again* to make things more modular.
I am pissed. This UA opened my eyes to one of the most disgusting parts of DnD. The diviner, or divination wizard, choosing the subclass of the school of divination, and specializing in the spells which are categorized as divination, were unable to learn a spell that is literally named DIVINATION!?!? Also augury, which i find weird too.
Also I don't like how they are giving everyone smite spells, it seems a bit cruel to the paladin spell list core defining feature. Paladin spells I am fine with, except spirit guardians. I like what they did with ranger, especially the primevial awareness replacement. What they did for warlock is great, but they should not be getting animate dead by any means other than maybe a once per long rest infusion. Aim should be an action that anyone can take, not just as a rogue for cunning action (making true strike even worse, but lets be honest that isn't that big a deal). Also, the cleric level 8 replacement is OP. +1d8 damage every turn, for both weapon and spell attacks. Warlocks should be able to switch their spells, sorcerers should be able to switch their cantrips, bards should not.
The one thing I like is the ability to switch out proficiencies, spells, etc. Locking people in was frustrating. While I don't hate most of the other stuff, some of it seems to be pushing away everything that made classes unique (monks get more weapons and non-monks get better punching than monks ever did; paladins get spirit guardians while non-paladins get smites, etc), giving almost too much flexibility, and spell lists should ABSOLUTELY NOT be changed. (Also Paladins don't need to be better.)
I think we can thank Sehanine they'll never put this into effect, since it would instantly make all the printed books people have almost totally obsolete. That said, I think we're ignoring the obvious.
5.5e would have the chance to fix so many things wrong with this game, and with Pathfinder 2 coming out and getting everybody so hot under the collar and reminding them how freaking cool it is to to have some frickin' control over your character development, now would absolutely be the time.
...which is why I'm convincing myself every day that there's no goddamned way Wizards is going to do it. 5e is still selling like gangbusters, they can continue to just phone it in and let their playerbase do all the work for them without lifting a finger or risking their cash cow. They're Wizards. We all know how this goes by now q.q
The one thing I like is the ability to switch out proficiencies, spells, etc. Locking people in was frustrating. While I don't hate most of the other stuff, some of it seems to be pushing away everything that made classes unique (monks get more weapons and non-monks get better punching than monks ever did; paladins get spirit guardians while non-paladins get smites, etc), giving almost too much flexibility, and spell lists should ABSOLUTELY NOT be changed. (Also Paladins don't need to be better.)
I think we can thank Sehanine they'll never put this into effect, since it would instantly make all the printed books people have almost totally obsolete. That said, I think we're ignoring the obvious.
They're developing 5.5e.
I actually don't agree with being able to switch out proficiencies. Like, in fiction, how would that work? Like "I studied diligently for years to become the best doctor I can be but *ding! level up* I'm really good at cartwheels now and have seemingly forgotten how to set a broken leg!"??
The additions to the Bard spell list, as well as "Magical Inspiration", are quite appropriate.
"Magical Inspiration" will help aid those spells that often require a roll to hit...increasing the likelihood of a good result, and no wasted spell slot (a very common fear among spellcasters).
I like that the spells added to the Bard spell list involve the manipulation of emotions, buffs and debuffs befitting a support class...
...but I like the "color" spells the most. "Color Spray", "Prismatic Spray" and "Prismatic Wall" are so visually appealing, it was strange that they were not included as Bard spells. Great for that "artistic" bard character.
"Tensers Transformation" on a Bard, though...look out. Those Valor Bards and Sword Bards just got more dangerous.
As others have said, the new favored enemy seems like it's a bit much when multiclass is taken into account. Seems like it would be better to base it off Ranger level rather than Wisdom.
"Magical Inspiration" will help aid those spells that often require a roll to hit...increasing the likelihood of a good result, and no wasted spell slot (a very common fear among spellcasters).
Actually, it only adds to damage or healing rolls. Thankfully, regular ol' Bardic Inspiration already can add to any kind of attack roll, including spell attacks.
Favored Foe goes too far. Its great for a straight Ranger but giving a non-concentration DPS boost as a level 1 class feature piles damage onto the more power-gamey multiclasses. Every assassin / gloomstalker / hexblade on the planet is drooling over this right now.
Nope, my Hexblade don't give 2 ****s about this, i'd rather they gave Warlocks 2 additional spell slots.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
BUT does this mean you can have the spell Hunter's Mark and the ability Hunter's Mark up simultaneously on two different enemies?
I am extremely ambivalent about swapping cantrips. On the one hand, it's a very practical thing to do, especially for players who pick cantrips that they have long since outgrown. On the other hand, the idea of swapping out cantrips flies in the face of what cantrips are purported to be.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I'm actually hoping this Spell Versatility thing is being lent to other classes from the Artificer, in Rising. It honestly makes a lot of sense for artificers.
Also? If anyone had any doubt left whatsoever that they have a huge character building sourcebook in the works? Maybe stop doubting that.
Please do not contact or message me.
There is a lot to unpack in this update. Some things that in particular caught my fancy:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Favored Foe goes too far. Its great for a straight Ranger but giving a non-concentration DPS boost as a level 1 class feature piles damage onto the more power-gamey multiclasses. Every assassin / gloomstalker / hexblade on the planet is drooling over this right now.
Yup. We've got a big one in the works, and my body is ready!
I also want to chime in that I want to see these options on D&D Beyond as soon as possible!
While I think the RAI is that the Hunter's Mark variant lacks concentration so that it doesn't interfere with the umpty dozen other Ranger spells that require concentration, there's nothing to stop you from casting all 5 of your variant Hunter's Marks (with a 20 WIS) plus a Hunter's Mark spell to cover six enemies at once. Why you would want to is not clear, other than some of the Hunter multiple-target attacks I suppose.
It does kind of show what an elegant solution concentration was, given how easy it is to screw with the game by removing it.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
A dizzying array of options...many of which seem quite fun and practical.
I particularly enjoy that "Pact of the Talisman" for the Warlock...it essentially gives you the flexibility to create an object you can flavor to your character, one that has interesting uses should you use the Invocations.
It also makes you a more skillful character, potentially...or an ally.
Damn...this Unearthed Arcana is such an injection of fresh ideas.
I really like a lot of these, especially for the Cleric and Ranger. Cantrip and spell swapping I'm unsure about -- those have the potential to lose a core part of what makes certain classes the way they are, but they're useful for new players, and hell, they're optional.
However, with all of these being optional, and these largely being changes to core class features, I kind of doubt we're going to see them added to D&D Beyond. I find it more likely we're going to be told to homebrew these on our own until they're done revamping the character builder *again* to make things more modular.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I am pissed. This UA opened my eyes to one of the most disgusting parts of DnD. The diviner, or divination wizard, choosing the subclass of the school of divination, and specializing in the spells which are categorized as divination, were unable to learn a spell that is literally named DIVINATION!?!? Also augury, which i find weird too.
Also I don't like how they are giving everyone smite spells, it seems a bit cruel to the paladin spell list core defining feature. Paladin spells I am fine with, except spirit guardians. I like what they did with ranger, especially the primevial awareness replacement. What they did for warlock is great, but they should not be getting animate dead by any means other than maybe a once per long rest infusion. Aim should be an action that anyone can take, not just as a rogue for cunning action (making true strike even worse, but lets be honest that isn't that big a deal). Also, the cleric level 8 replacement is OP. +1d8 damage every turn, for both weapon and spell attacks. Warlocks should be able to switch their spells, sorcerers should be able to switch their cantrips, bards should not.
The one thing I like is the ability to switch out proficiencies, spells, etc. Locking people in was frustrating. While I don't hate most of the other stuff, some of it seems to be pushing away everything that made classes unique (monks get more weapons and non-monks get better punching than monks ever did; paladins get spirit guardians while non-paladins get smites, etc), giving almost too much flexibility, and spell lists should ABSOLUTELY NOT be changed. (Also Paladins don't need to be better.)
I think we can thank Sehanine they'll never put this into effect, since it would instantly make all the printed books people have almost totally obsolete. That said, I think we're ignoring the obvious.
They're developing 5.5e.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I'm trying to rein in my expectations here, man!
5.5e would have the chance to fix so many things wrong with this game, and with Pathfinder 2 coming out and getting everybody so hot under the collar and reminding them how freaking cool it is to to have some frickin' control over your character development, now would absolutely be the time.
...which is why I'm convincing myself every day that there's no goddamned way Wizards is going to do it. 5e is still selling like gangbusters, they can continue to just phone it in and let their playerbase do all the work for them without lifting a finger or risking their cash cow. They're Wizards. We all know how this goes by now q.q
Please do not contact or message me.
Sorcerers can now twin Foresight, and I am a happy half-elf.
Partway through the quest for absolute truth.
I actually don't agree with being able to switch out proficiencies. Like, in fiction, how would that work? Like "I studied diligently for years to become the best doctor I can be but *ding! level up* I'm really good at cartwheels now and have seemingly forgotten how to set a broken leg!"??
The additions to the Bard spell list, as well as "Magical Inspiration", are quite appropriate.
"Magical Inspiration" will help aid those spells that often require a roll to hit...increasing the likelihood of a good result, and no wasted spell slot (a very common fear among spellcasters).
I like that the spells added to the Bard spell list involve the manipulation of emotions, buffs and debuffs befitting a support class...
...but I like the "color" spells the most. "Color Spray", "Prismatic Spray" and "Prismatic Wall" are so visually appealing, it was strange that they were not included as Bard spells. Great for that "artistic" bard character.
"Tensers Transformation" on a Bard, though...look out. Those Valor Bards and Sword Bards just got more dangerous.
As others have said, the new favored enemy seems like it's a bit much when multiclass is taken into account. Seems like it would be better to base it off Ranger level rather than Wisdom.
Actually, it only adds to damage or healing rolls. Thankfully, regular ol' Bardic Inspiration already can add to any kind of attack roll, including spell attacks.
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!
Nope, my Hexblade don't give 2 ****s about this, i'd rather they gave Warlocks 2 additional spell slots.
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
Kain de Frostberg- Dark Knight - (Vengeance Pal3/ Hexblade 9), Port Mourn
Kain de Draakberg-Dark Knight lvl8-Avergreen(DitA)