And you have a better chance of killing a dragon with summoning a bunch of flying beasts with Conjure Animals than use Favored Foe (Which is garbage IMO).
I agree. Both Favored Foe and Favored Enemy are garbage.
Overall I like the direction of the UA's at least as they are fixing some issues with pets and monks resource pool issues.
I agree.
I hope they come out with more CFV that give all sorcerers an origin list and address conjure spells. An errata is really needed for those as they are just plain terrible to deal with even if they put out great damage.
Also agreed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I feel that so much. Honestly, no matter how awesome I think playing a conjurer or necromancer might be, dealing with how the old summoning spells worked was annoying to me, both as a DM and as a player. Also, yea Sorcerers need innate spells, I think everyone can agree with that. Honestly, I'm still of the mind that Warlock should just gain their spells from the subclass as well, but that might be a controversial opinion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Warlocks definitely need to automatically get their spells from their backgrounds. It sucks to have to give up one of your precious spells known as a hexblade to cast shield once, or maybe twice, a combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Am I the only one who didn't expect much more in Tasha's beyond what we saw in UA? The UA stuff was the primary reason I wanted the book.
Ehhhhhhh...there's a lot I could say about the transition from UA to publication (the unnecessary cutting of content, the over-reliance of spells as class features, the over-reliance on proficiency bonus), but it's not just that, it's the way the book is structured as well: the paltry amount of space dedicated to the lineage system, the way tattoos were hyped up as their own item type but then rolled in as being more generic, the way spell customization is only dedicated to flavor without giving guidelines on how to change damage types without unbalancing the system, etc, etc. But again: I could write an entire dissertation on the matter, and I'd prefer not to right this moment.
So, to bring things back on track, one thing I really want to see is rune magic reintroduced; it was super cool in concept, and it deserves to be it’s own system like Channel Divinity or the Psionic Power Pool.
Is that what we’re gonna see? Probably not. The last couple UA’s had spoopy and dragon themed subclasses, and unless WotC continues throwing curveballs like they did with TCoE (which, frankly, had NO thematic coherence to it), I’d surmise that the next UA is going to be something along those lines.
So, to bring things back on track, one thing I really want to see is rune magic reintroduced; it was super cool in concept, and it deserves to be it’s own system like Channel Divinity or the Psionic Power Pool.
Is that what we’re gonna see? Probably not. The last couple UA’s had spoopy and dragon themed subclasses, and unless WotC continues throwing curveballs like they did with TCoE (which, frankly, had NO thematic coherence to it), I’d surmise that the next UA is going to be something along those lines.
i assume you mean the rune magic prestige class they introduced in an UA long ago not the rune knight fighter
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
Kinda, sorta. Prestige classes are (at least for the moment) out, but I'd like to see rune magic introduced as possibly a subclass option (a la the Psionic Power Pool), where each individual rune can have some kind of base, cantrip-like effect and one or two more potent effects that can be used with a spell slot.
Do I expect to see that? Absolutely not. But it'd be nice, I think...
I am hoping they do an exploration book myself....they need to open that pillar of the game up as right now its a crumbling pile that has a sign on it that says "Roll a Survival check"
I am hoping they do an exploration book myself....they need to open that pillar of the game up as right now its a crumbling pile that has a sign on it that says "Roll a Survival check"
true, like there are rules for enviormental hazards, how much food you need to eat and drink, etc but nothing on how to add interesting decisions and creativity to it, with the exception of clever use of wild shape and some spells all class features that touch on exploration do it in such a way where they just ignore the pillar entirely such as the background options, natural explorer and i'd argue the totem warrior is equal to the ranger in this territory
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
Kinda, sorta. Prestige classes are (at least for the moment) out, but I'd like to see rune magic introduced as possibly a subclass option (a la the Psionic Power Pool), where each individual rune can have some kind of base, cantrip-like effect and one or two more potent effects that can be used with a spell slot.
Do I expect to see that? Absolutely not. But it'd be nice, I think...
I want a Rune Smith Artificer so much, as well as a Rune Caster as either a Wizard subclass or unique class. It's probably not gonna happen, but I still want it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Drakewarden and the Ascendant Dragon suggest a dragon theme. There could be a warlock with a draconic pact, a dragon slayer ranger, or a Sarkhan Vol-ish barbarian.
twice over has the archetype of the dragon slayer been covered by ranger subclasses. By making a hunter ranger that chooses giant killer, steel will, and evasion you are essentially specialized in fighting dragons as you are better at fighting big things (such as dragons), at fighting of fear effects (like the frightful presence of dragons) and at doging things that require dexterity saving throws (like most dragons). Heck you could even choose multiattack defense (since dragons often have multiattack) and colossus slayer (since dragons typically work alone and you should be trying to wear them down over time) instead and still be quite an fearsome dragon slayer.
And if that was not enough, the monster slayer ranger deals with more magical threats, and the fluff for the class even outright names dragons as one of the things they typically fight as part of their class duty, and the subclass itself helps you suceed on saving throws against a single target you choose (helping both against the breath weapon and against frightful presence), the only thing that does not make you more specialized against dragon hunting specifically is the 11th level feature (since not all dragons will have the abillity to cast spells or teleport, but many do indeed), their subclass spells that often have no effect against dragons and learning the resistances and immunities of a particular type of dragon (something that should not be hard when the dragons are color-coded after the damage resistances and immunities they have). There is simply no room for a ranger subclass dedicated only to fighting dragons to exist when two existing subclasses will do just as good of a job at being specialized against dragons while still doing wonders against non-dragons.
Heck you can even argue somewhat that the drakewarden ranger is also a rather good dragonslayer subclass, as you can summon a drake that is immune to the damage type of the target dragon's breath weapon while using your own breath weapon of a different damage type
The Drakewarden and the Ascendant Dragon suggest a dragon theme. There could be a warlock with a draconic pact, a dragon slayer ranger, or a Sarkhan Vol-ish barbarian.
twice over has the archetype of the dragon slayer been covered by ranger subclasses. By making a hunter ranger that chooses giant killer, steel will, and evasion you are essentially specialized in fighting dragons as you are better at fighting big things (such as dragons), at fighting of fear effects (like the frightful presence of dragons) and at doging things that require dexterity saving throws (like most dragons). Heck you could even choose multiattack defense (since dragons often have multiattack) and colossus slayer (since dragons typically work alone and you should be trying to wear them down over time) instead and still be quite the dragon slayer.
And if that was not enough, the monster slayer ranger deals with more magical threats, and the fluff for the class even outright names dragons as one of the things they typically fight as part of their class duty, and the subclass itself helps you suceed on saving throws against a single target you choose (helping both against the breath weapon and against frightful presence), the only thing that does not make you more specialized against dragon hunting specifically is the 11th level feature (since not all dragons will have the abillity to cast spells or teleport, but many do indeed), their subclass spells that often have no effect against dragons and learning the resistances and immunities of a particular type of dragon (something that should not be hard when the dragons are colour-coded after the damage resistances and immunities they have). There is simply no room for a ranger subclass dedicated only to dragons to exist when two existing subclasses will do just as good of a job at being specialized against dragons while still doing wonders against non-dragons
Hunter for sure is meant to deal with a variety of creatures that impose threats to his Will....but its later in the game and is honestly not the best hunter of such creatures since the features of Favored Enemy are so poor. The features of Hunter are more general in that they really are good for most creature types.
Hunter can fight most things I guess is my point and would be a good fit for any flavor choice related to hunting a specific type of creature.
The Drakewarden and the Ascendant Dragon suggest a dragon theme. There could be a warlock with a draconic pact, a dragon slayer ranger, or a Sarkhan Vol-ish barbarian.
twice over has the archetype of the dragon slayer been covered by ranger subclasses. By making a hunter ranger that chooses giant killer, steel will, and evasion you are essentially specialized in fighting dragons as you are better at fighting big things (such as dragons), at fighting of fear effects (like the frightful presence of dragons) and at doging things that require dexterity saving throws (like most dragons). Heck you could even choose multiattack defense (since dragons often have multiattack) and colossus slayer (since dragons typically work alone and you should be trying to wear them down over time) instead and still be quite the dragon slayer.
And if that was not enough, the monster slayer ranger deals with more magical threats, and the fluff for the class even outright names dragons as one of the things they typically fight as part of their class duty, and the subclass itself helps you suceed on saving throws against a single target you choose (helping both against the breath weapon and against frightful presence), the only thing that does not make you more specialized against dragon hunting specifically is the 11th level feature (since not all dragons will have the abillity to cast spells or teleport, but many do indeed), their subclass spells that often have no effect against dragons and learning the resistances and immunities of a particular type of dragon (something that should not be hard when the dragons are colour-coded after the damage resistances and immunities they have). There is simply no room for a ranger subclass dedicated only to dragons to exist when two existing subclasses will do just as good of a job at being specialized against dragons while still doing wonders against non-dragons
Hunter for sure is meant to deal with a variety of creatures that impose threats to his Will....but its later in the game and is honestly not the best hunter of such creatures since the features of Favored Enemy are so poor. The features of Hunter are more general in that they really are good for most creature types.
Hunter can fight most things I guess is my point and would be a good fit for any flavor choice related to hunting a specific type of creature.
But ArtificeMeal's point is why have a dedicated class that focuses on killing ONLY dragons when you have general classes that do it just as good. Even in a dragon heavy campaign how often are you fighting dragon bosses? Having a dragon themed subclass (of any class) is more versatile because it doesn't rely on who you're fighting.
The Drakewarden and the Ascendant Dragon suggest a dragon theme. There could be a warlock with a draconic pact, a dragon slayer ranger, or a Sarkhan Vol-ish barbarian.
twice over has the archetype of the dragon slayer been covered by ranger subclasses. By making a hunter ranger that chooses giant killer, steel will, and evasion you are essentially specialized in fighting dragons as you are better at fighting big things (such as dragons), at fighting of fear effects (like the frightful presence of dragons) and at doging things that require dexterity saving throws (like most dragons). Heck you could even choose multiattack defense (since dragons often have multiattack) and colossus slayer (since dragons typically work alone and you should be trying to wear them down over time) instead and still be quite the dragon slayer.
And if that was not enough, the monster slayer ranger deals with more magical threats, and the fluff for the class even outright names dragons as one of the things they typically fight as part of their class duty, and the subclass itself helps you suceed on saving throws against a single target you choose (helping both against the breath weapon and against frightful presence), the only thing that does not make you more specialized against dragon hunting specifically is the 11th level feature (since not all dragons will have the abillity to cast spells or teleport, but many do indeed), their subclass spells that often have no effect against dragons and learning the resistances and immunities of a particular type of dragon (something that should not be hard when the dragons are colour-coded after the damage resistances and immunities they have). There is simply no room for a ranger subclass dedicated only to dragons to exist when two existing subclasses will do just as good of a job at being specialized against dragons while still doing wonders against non-dragons
Hunter for sure is meant to deal with a variety of creatures that impose threats to his Will....but its later in the game and is honestly not the best hunter of such creatures since the features of Favored Enemy are so poor. The features of Hunter are more general in that they really are good for most creature types.
Hunter can fight most things I guess is my point and would be a good fit for any flavor choice related to hunting a specific type of creature.
But ArtificeMeal's point is why have a dedicated class that focuses on killing ONLY dragons when you have general classes that do it just as good. Even in a dragon heavy campaign how often are you fighting dragon bosses? Having a dragon themed subclass (of any class) is more versatile because it doesn't rely on who you're fighting.
Ah I misunderstood....you are right.
Yeah Drakenward is better as it has a separate take on it you are right.
It should be like the Genie warlock, where they get different features, spells, and abilities based on their patron type.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Exactly!
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
*cough cough Third_Sundering's one cough cough*
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
My idea for the ranger would be focused on flying creatures in general.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
I agree. Both Favored Foe and Favored Enemy are garbage.
I agree.
Also agreed.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I feel that so much. Honestly, no matter how awesome I think playing a conjurer or necromancer might be, dealing with how the old summoning spells worked was annoying to me, both as a DM and as a player. Also, yea Sorcerers need innate spells, I think everyone can agree with that. Honestly, I'm still of the mind that Warlock should just gain their spells from the subclass as well, but that might be a controversial opinion.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Warlocks definitely need to automatically get their spells from their backgrounds. It sucks to have to give up one of your precious spells known as a hexblade to cast shield once, or maybe twice, a combat.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Ehhhhhhh...there's a lot I could say about the transition from UA to publication (the unnecessary cutting of content, the over-reliance of spells as class features, the over-reliance on proficiency bonus), but it's not just that, it's the way the book is structured as well: the paltry amount of space dedicated to the lineage system, the way tattoos were hyped up as their own item type but then rolled in as being more generic, the way spell customization is only dedicated to flavor without giving guidelines on how to change damage types without unbalancing the system, etc, etc. But again: I could write an entire dissertation on the matter, and I'd prefer not to right this moment.
So, to bring things back on track, one thing I really want to see is rune magic reintroduced; it was super cool in concept, and it deserves to be it’s own system like Channel Divinity or the Psionic Power Pool.
Is that what we’re gonna see? Probably not. The last couple UA’s had spoopy and dragon themed subclasses, and unless WotC continues throwing curveballs like they did with TCoE (which, frankly, had NO thematic coherence to it), I’d surmise that the next UA is going to be something along those lines.
i assume you mean the rune magic prestige class they introduced in an UA long ago not the rune knight fighter
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
Kinda, sorta. Prestige classes are (at least for the moment) out, but I'd like to see rune magic introduced as possibly a subclass option (a la the Psionic Power Pool), where each individual rune can have some kind of base, cantrip-like effect and one or two more potent effects that can be used with a spell slot.
Do I expect to see that? Absolutely not. But it'd be nice, I think...
I am hoping they do an exploration book myself....they need to open that pillar of the game up as right now its a crumbling pile that has a sign on it that says "Roll a Survival check"
true, like there are rules for enviormental hazards, how much food you need to eat and drink, etc but nothing on how to add interesting decisions and creativity to it, with the exception of clever use of wild shape and some spells all class features that touch on exploration do it in such a way where they just ignore the pillar entirely such as the background options, natural explorer and i'd argue the totem warrior is equal to the ranger in this territory
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
I want a Rune Smith Artificer so much, as well as a Rune Caster as either a Wizard subclass or unique class. It's probably not gonna happen, but I still want it.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
There's already a rune sorcerer in Tal' Dorei.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
twice over has the archetype of the dragon slayer been covered by ranger subclasses. By making a hunter ranger that chooses giant killer, steel will, and evasion you are essentially specialized in fighting dragons as you are better at fighting big things (such as dragons), at fighting of fear effects (like the frightful presence of dragons) and at doging things that require dexterity saving throws (like most dragons). Heck you could even choose multiattack defense (since dragons often have multiattack) and colossus slayer (since dragons typically work alone and you should be trying to wear them down over time) instead and still be quite an fearsome dragon slayer.
And if that was not enough, the monster slayer ranger deals with more magical threats, and the fluff for the class even outright names dragons as one of the things they typically fight as part of their class duty, and the subclass itself helps you suceed on saving throws against a single target you choose (helping both against the breath weapon and against frightful presence), the only thing that does not make you more specialized against dragon hunting specifically is the 11th level feature (since not all dragons will have the abillity to cast spells or teleport, but many do indeed), their subclass spells that often have no effect against dragons and learning the resistances and immunities of a particular type of dragon (something that should not be hard when the dragons are color-coded after the damage resistances and immunities they have). There is simply no room for a ranger subclass dedicated only to fighting dragons to exist when two existing subclasses will do just as good of a job at being specialized against dragons while still doing wonders against non-dragons.
Heck you can even argue somewhat that the drakewarden ranger is also a rather good dragonslayer subclass, as you can summon a drake that is immune to the damage type of the target dragon's breath weapon while using your own breath weapon of a different damage type
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
Hunter for sure is meant to deal with a variety of creatures that impose threats to his Will....but its later in the game and is honestly not the best hunter of such creatures since the features of Favored Enemy are so poor. The features of Hunter are more general in that they really are good for most creature types.
Hunter can fight most things I guess is my point and would be a good fit for any flavor choice related to hunting a specific type of creature.
But ArtificeMeal's point is why have a dedicated class that focuses on killing ONLY dragons when you have general classes that do it just as good. Even in a dragon heavy campaign how often are you fighting dragon bosses? Having a dragon themed subclass (of any class) is more versatile because it doesn't rely on who you're fighting.
Ah I misunderstood....you are right.
Yeah Drakenward is better as it has a separate take on it you are right.
That book isn't official.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms