I can see the fey ranger being altered. Split in half for the selene and the unseline court akin to what had been done to the genine to a lesser degree.
The wild soul barbarian could defo use some rework, it's a stellar idea I'd say. Just a bit too powerful. Possibly could get a longer random rage table with some negative things included to get the spirit of the sorc.
It's possible some other UA can get reworked into a Artificer?
I could also see the star druid reworked as a cleric, a sort of oracle or follower of a god that has star stuff, like the greeks... or glassblowers kit artificer. "Behold the power of my TELESCOPE!"
I could also see the star druid reworked as a cleric, a sort of oracle or follower of a god that has star stuff, like the greeks... or glassblowers kit artificer. "Behold the power of my TELESCOPE!"
I could see that happening, yes. Do I want it to happen? No. One hundred times no. It should stay a druid, IMHO.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Perhaps we should ask what subclasses get updated?
Astral Self Monk, Watchers Paladin, Twilight Cleric, and Armorer Artificer.
(All of those are probably wrong. What are your guesses?)
I'd go with all of these and Wildfire Druid. I also think Onomancy bard would be super cool.
They normally just fix the subclasses that need small fixes and don't playtest the new version, just stick it in the book. I don't think they'll playtest the Wildfire Druid again, as it was perfect. Astral Self Monk has a lot to fix, so does the Watchers paladin, Twilight Cleric, and the Armorer even has a bit that needs fixing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Planeshift articles were abandoned when they made Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica. They're going to make more M:tG setting books, because they make money off of them. The Theros book is proof that they're going to continue making M:tG settings as D&D 5e books.
So, yes, there was no indication that they'd abandoned M:tG books. Innistrad is one of the more popular settings, so I think it'll be coming within the next few years.
well yeah they are going to make more stuff from magic: the gathering, the first sentence i wrote was just dumb, but hey i am defenetly confident if they are going to release another magic the gathering setting they are not going to call it "plane shift: (setting name)", they will use more creative names like mystic odysseys of Theros or guildmasters guide to ravnica
Possible book names:
Horrific Hauntings of Innistrad
Explorer's Jungle Guide to Ixalan
Planeswalker's Guide to Dominaria
Artificer's Manual to Kaladesh
a book i really really really want to happen is something along the lines of "acererak's hidden tombe of secret magic" all about player options letting people do more NPC magic sort of stuff, even if those player options are never avialable to players, stuff like how to create skeleton horses and specific types of zombie ogres, how to summon fiends that are not demons or devils, how an spellcaster can turn into a lich (or at least an template for turning any old high level spellcasting NPC into an lich for use only by dungeon masters). Just all arround evil or weird magic that players are not able to do, as well as extra weird and evil magic that is villain-only, more random customization tables like the demon tables and cult specializations, using the class feature variants rules to represent specific patrons within a single pact, maybe orcus warlocks get more spells to do with death and decay, perhaps fierna warlocks get spells more in line with enchantment and a slightly diffrent 1st level feature, similarly for the archfey some archfey might grant slightly diffrent spells to your list
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
The reason I'd want them to be villain exclusive is that they wouldn't work like player options do, that's the mistake they made with the Death domain Cleric and Oathbreaker paladin. They made them work like player options so players would want to have them.
You know the demonic boons from Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes? It would be kind of like that. Options only available for villains, and functioning different from player options so the players wouldn't be able to take them, or want to take them.
Like, rituals. Not ritual spells, but evil rituals that do certain things.
Example: They lay out an outline for what parts these rituals have, like what material components they would have, how many people/souls/sacrifices they'd require, and other information like that.
They'd have to give different steps to the rituals, options for what happens if it is ended before it should (like the players interrupt it and a mishap occurs), they'd also give reasons why players couldn't do them, like they require knowledge from demon lords or liches.
So, what I want in terms of villain options are special evil rituals they can do, how to become a lich, uses for souls, what sacrificing people does, and other such information.
So, rules for what villains can do outside their stat blocks.
Does this make sense?
Does it sound cool?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
So, they got rid of the Psionics wizard and aberrant mind sorcerer to become the Psionic Sorcerer, and that caused a void for the Wizard subclasses in the Unearthed Arcana for if they want another subclass in the next book, so they took the Archivist, turned it into a Wizard subclass, and that's that. It's strangely complicated.
Now, they took a subclass away from the Artificer. Do you think they'll replace it with anything, or just leave it as is, or is the Armorer the replacement for the Archivist?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
So, they got rid of the Psionics wizard and aberrant mind sorcerer to become the Psionic Sorcerer, and that caused a void for the Wizard subclasses in the Unearthed Arcana for if they want another subclass in the next book, so they took the Archivist, turned it into a Wizard subclass, and that's that. It's strangely complicated.
Now, they took a subclass away from the Artificer. Do you think they'll replace it with anything, or just leave it as is, or is the Armorer the replacement for the Archivist?
I think the Armor is a very likely and appropriate candidate to replace Archivist. I think it fits the tech theme of the Artificer better to be honest.
So, they got rid of the Psionics wizard and aberrant mind sorcerer to become the Psionic Sorcerer, and that caused a void for the Wizard subclasses in the Unearthed Arcana for if they want another subclass in the next book, so they took the Archivist, turned it into a Wizard subclass, and that's that. It's strangely complicated.
Now, they took a subclass away from the Artificer. Do you think they'll replace it with anything, or just leave it as is, or is the Armorer the replacement for the Archivist?
I think the Armor is a very likely and appropriate candidate to replace Archivist. I think it fits the tech theme of the Artificer better to be honest.
I can't say if this is or isn't true, but I would be sad if the next book only has 1 new artificer subclass.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The reason I'd want them to be villain exclusive is that they wouldn't work like player options do, that's the mistake they made with the Death domain Cleric and Oathbreaker paladin. They made them work like player options so players would want to have them
I don't consider it a mistake at all for the Death cleric, even if it is considered one by WoTC. Not all characters are good or think Death is a taboo thing. We have Necromancy wizards and Undying warlocks, so why wouldn't we have a Death cleric, which is pretty much one of the few cleric subclasses where Animate Dead makes sense? To me, it would have been worse if players couldn't use it.
I'd like to see the attacks from the armorer work more like cantrips that extra attacks,. That seems more appropriate than melee attack but with mental attributes.
The reason I'd want them to be villain exclusive is that they wouldn't work like player options do, that's the mistake they made with the Death domain Cleric and Oathbreaker paladin. They made them work like player options so players would want to have them
I don't consider it a mistake at all for the Death cleric, even if it is considered one by WoTC. Not all characters are good or think Death is a taboo thing. We have Necromancy wizards and Undying warlocks, so why wouldn't we have a Death cleric, which is pretty much one of the few cleric subclasses where Animate Dead makes sense? To me, it would have been worse if players couldn't use it.
I don't consider it a mistake if they want players to be able to use them, I let my players be them if they'd like, but if they wanted them to only be available to villains, they should've designed it differently.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
So, they got rid of the Psionics wizard and aberrant mind sorcerer to become the Psionic Sorcerer, and that caused a void for the Wizard subclasses in the Unearthed Arcana for if they want another subclass in the next book, so they took the Archivist, turned it into a Wizard subclass, and that's that. It's strangely complicated.
Now, they took a subclass away from the Artificer. Do you think they'll replace it with anything, or just leave it as is, or is the Armorer the replacement for the Archivist?
I really hope they revisit the artificer and give it some more subclass options, cause i need something better than the Alchemist fr. While im not opposed to the idea of the Scribes wizard from the ashes of the Archivist (which i didnt really care about) because pretty much all of the wizard sub classes are pretty uninspired, i would rather them dedicate the resources to the freshman player option. That and i would love for them to retool Twilight domain into a tool for someone else cause right now it just feels like Trickery Domain 2: Revenge of the Power Gamers and i aint about that
Well, "objectively"was intended to be hyperbolic, but..
No weapon/armor proficiencies despite being a martial cleric (I don't think it should have heavy armor, mind you. But martial proficiencies, or at least limited weapon proficiencies would be nice), and to top it all off, it has freakin' poison for its divine strike! Extra damage is extra damage, but it's the most resisted element in the game, so you'll be doing less damage because your weapons are weaker, and there's a decent chance your divine strike will be resisted, doing even less damage. And since your armor isn't heavy, you'll probably just resort to using attack cantrips or a crossbow, but guess what? You're a martial cleric! no bonus to cantrips.
Blessing of the Trickster is actually bad as it only works on one person at a time/doesn't work on the user. Is it useful at times? Yea, I suppose. But since you're only allowed to use it on one person (not yourself), you essentially wind up using it to make the sneaky guy sneakier, or help the fat kid in heavy armor pass his stealth check so he doesn't blow the group cover. A cleric of a different domain could use Guidance and get a roughly equivalent effect depending on the difficulty of the roll.
Invoke duplicity is mediocre at best. It requires concentration when no other Cleric CD does, it has a relatively short duration that makes it less than ideal for non-combat situations (Which I personally feel that Trickery should absolutely shine in), and it relies on your own senses, meaning it can't be used for scouting. This restricts it to being either a free advantage for a multi-classed rogue/cleric, or a displaced spell use (but no concentration spells, so yea).
Cloak of Shadows is neat. Seriously, I have no complaints.. And while I'm at it, the spell list is pretty good too. Thematically pleasing and I can see each spell being useful in a variety of situations.
Despite how negative I'm being, it's still a cool domain, and very flavorful to boot. I just wish it was better, is all. I've played it a few times before and had a blast messing around, but I always felt as if I wasn't as useful as I could've been if I played a different type of cleric, and that really puts a damper on the fun for me. Yea, it shines pretty well if you multiclass with Rogue, but can you say a domain is truly good if it needs to multiclass to get maximum benefit?
Well, "objectively"was intended to be hyperbolic, but..
No weapon/armor proficiencies despite being a martial cleric (I don't think it should have heavy armor, mind you. But martial proficiencies, or at least limited weapon proficiencies would be nice), and to top it all off, it has freakin' poison for its divine strike! Extra damage is extra damage, but it's the most resisted element in the game, so you'll be doing less damage because your weapons are weaker, and there's a decent chance your divine strike will be resisted, doing even less damage. And since your armor isn't heavy, you'll probably just resort to using attack cantrips or a crossbow, but guess what? You're a martial cleric! no bonus to cantrips.
Blessing of the Trickster is actually bad as it only works on one person at a time/doesn't work on the user. Is it useful at times? Yea, I suppose. But since you're only allowed to use it on one person (not yourself), you essentially wind up using it to make the sneaky guy sneakier, or help the fat kid in heavy armor pass his stealth check so he doesn't blow the group cover. A cleric of a different domain could use Guidance and get a roughly equivalent effect depending on the difficulty of the roll.
Invoke duplicity is mediocre at best. It requires concentration when no other Cleric CD does, it has a relatively short duration that makes it less than ideal for non-combat situations (Which I personally feel that Trickery should absolutely shine in), and it relies on your own senses, meaning it can't be used for scouting. This restricts it to being either a free advantage for a multi-classed rogue/cleric, or a displaced spell use (but no concentration spells, so yea).
Cloak of Shadows is neat. Seriously, I have no complaints.. And while I'm at it, the spell list is pretty good too. Thematically pleasing and I can see each spell being useful in a variety of situations.
Despite how negative I'm being, it's still a cool domain, and very flavorful to boot. I just wish it was better, is all. I've played it a few times before and had a blast messing around, but I always felt as if I wasn't as useful as I could've been if I played a different type of cleric, and that really puts a damper on the fun for me. Yea, it shines pretty well if you multiclass with Rogue, but can you say a domain is truly good if it needs to multiclass to get maximum benefit?
Trickery is the worst Cleric domain but is bolstered by the fact the cleric class is so strong anyway. It ends up working just fine as a result. They get a pretty solid spell list which helps bolster it a lot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I can see the fey ranger being altered. Split in half for the selene and the unseline court akin to what had been done to the genine to a lesser degree.
The wild soul barbarian could defo use some rework, it's a stellar idea I'd say. Just a bit too powerful. Possibly could get a longer random rage table with some negative things included to get the spirit of the sorc.
It's possible some other UA can get reworked into a Artificer?
I doubt it, but I'd love to see something like that. Onomancy Bard, maybe?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
That would be cool.
I could also see the star druid reworked as a cleric, a sort of oracle or follower of a god that has star stuff, like the greeks... or glassblowers kit artificer. "Behold the power of my TELESCOPE!"
I'd go with all of these and Wildfire Druid. I also think Onomancy bard would be super cool.
Please check out my homebrew and give me feedback!
Subclasses | Races | Spells | Magic Items | Monsters | Feats | Backgrounds
Exactly my feelings. I was waiting for yesterday's UA FOREVER!
Please check out my homebrew and give me feedback!
Subclasses | Races | Spells | Magic Items | Monsters | Feats | Backgrounds
I could see that happening, yes. Do I want it to happen? No. One hundred times no. It should stay a druid, IMHO.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
They normally just fix the subclasses that need small fixes and don't playtest the new version, just stick it in the book. I don't think they'll playtest the Wildfire Druid again, as it was perfect. Astral Self Monk has a lot to fix, so does the Watchers paladin, Twilight Cleric, and the Armorer even has a bit that needs fixing.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
a book i really really really want to happen is something along the lines of "acererak's hidden tombe of secret magic" all about player options letting people do more NPC magic sort of stuff, even if those player options are never avialable to players, stuff like how to create skeleton horses and specific types of zombie ogres, how to summon fiends that are not demons or devils, how an spellcaster can turn into a lich (or at least an template for turning any old high level spellcasting NPC into an lich for use only by dungeon masters). Just all arround evil or weird magic that players are not able to do, as well as extra weird and evil magic that is villain-only, more random customization tables like the demon tables and cult specializations, using the class feature variants rules to represent specific patrons within a single pact, maybe orcus warlocks get more spells to do with death and decay, perhaps fierna warlocks get spells more in line with enchantment and a slightly diffrent 1st level feature, similarly for the archfey some archfey might grant slightly diffrent spells to your list
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
So, a bit like this?:
The reason I'd want them to be villain exclusive is that they wouldn't work like player options do, that's the mistake they made with the Death domain Cleric and Oathbreaker paladin. They made them work like player options so players would want to have them.
You know the demonic boons from Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes? It would be kind of like that. Options only available for villains, and functioning different from player options so the players wouldn't be able to take them, or want to take them.
Like, rituals. Not ritual spells, but evil rituals that do certain things.
Example: They lay out an outline for what parts these rituals have, like what material components they would have, how many people/souls/sacrifices they'd require, and other information like that.
They'd have to give different steps to the rituals, options for what happens if it is ended before it should (like the players interrupt it and a mishap occurs), they'd also give reasons why players couldn't do them, like they require knowledge from demon lords or liches.
So, what I want in terms of villain options are special evil rituals they can do, how to become a lich, uses for souls, what sacrificing people does, and other such information.
So, rules for what villains can do outside their stat blocks.
Does this make sense?
Does it sound cool?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
So, they got rid of the Psionics wizard and aberrant mind sorcerer to become the Psionic Sorcerer, and that caused a void for the Wizard subclasses in the Unearthed Arcana for if they want another subclass in the next book, so they took the Archivist, turned it into a Wizard subclass, and that's that. It's strangely complicated.
Now, they took a subclass away from the Artificer. Do you think they'll replace it with anything, or just leave it as is, or is the Armorer the replacement for the Archivist?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think the Armor is a very likely and appropriate candidate to replace Archivist. I think it fits the tech theme of the Artificer better to be honest.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I can't say if this is or isn't true, but I would be sad if the next book only has 1 new artificer subclass.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I don't consider it a mistake at all for the Death cleric, even if it is considered one by WoTC. Not all characters are good or think Death is a taboo thing. We have Necromancy wizards and Undying warlocks, so why wouldn't we have a Death cleric, which is pretty much one of the few cleric subclasses where Animate Dead makes sense? To me, it would have been worse if players couldn't use it.
I'd like to see the attacks from the armorer work more like cantrips that extra attacks,. That seems more appropriate than melee attack but with mental attributes.
I don't consider it a mistake if they want players to be able to use them, I let my players be them if they'd like, but if they wanted them to only be available to villains, they should've designed it differently.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I really hope they revisit the artificer and give it some more subclass options, cause i need something better than the Alchemist fr. While im not opposed to the idea of the Scribes wizard from the ashes of the Archivist (which i didnt really care about) because pretty much all of the wizard sub classes are pretty uninspired, i would rather them dedicate the resources to the freshman player option. That and i would love for them to retool Twilight domain into a tool for someone else cause right now it just feels like Trickery Domain 2: Revenge of the Power Gamers and i aint about that
I agree with you mostly, but I like that it's basically Trickery 2.0, because I can have the same flavor and not have it be objectively terrible.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Why is Trickery "objectively" terrible?
Well, "objectively" was intended to be hyperbolic, but..
Despite how negative I'm being, it's still a cool domain, and very flavorful to boot. I just wish it was better, is all. I've played it a few times before and had a blast messing around, but I always felt as if I wasn't as useful as I could've been if I played a different type of cleric, and that really puts a damper on the fun for me. Yea, it shines pretty well if you multiclass with Rogue, but can you say a domain is truly good if it needs to multiclass to get maximum benefit?
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Trickery is the worst Cleric domain but is bolstered by the fact the cleric class is so strong anyway. It ends up working just fine as a result. They get a pretty solid spell list which helps bolster it a lot.