What I would love to see is some solid crafting rules. And also some rules, by subclassing or whatever, for a wizard to create their own spells. At least 1 spell in his entire career and/or any cantrip. I know those rules would be very complicated to design, but it would be nice to see.
There are half decent crafting rules in Xanathar’s Guide.
As for Wizards creating spells, that would simply require following the guidelines in the DMG for homebrewing and then the regular Wizard rules to learn the spell. Technically speaking, even when you “learn” official spells at every level, you can always play it as your character having invented some of those spells for themself.
Yes, you are right about the spells. The problem is that many DMs are not very comfortable playing with homebrew. That's why I think it would be nice to have a wizard subclass that, instead of learning two spells from the list when leveling up, could "invent" their own. Or perhaps that at level 2 he "invented" his spell by being able to choose certain "properties" from a list, and that he could then add things to the spell at level 6, 10 and 14. Perhaps making the spell level up as that you add things to it, or something like that. I do not know. Or maybe at 2nd level you could invent a cantrip. At level 6 modify some properties of one or two existing spells (something similar to what order of scribes does, but not only with the damage type), and at level 10 and 14 create a spell from 0. And yes, thematically you can always say that your Tasha's Caustic Brew is actually "Bibaf Nom's spit", and that you invented it (Bibaf Nom, obviously).
There's a reason a lot of DMs are cautious about homebrew. The homebrew rules don't do a great job of explaining the parameters of spell levels, and the guidelines that are given are easily ignored by homebrewers ... just tour the homebrew spells on this site.
In terms of running the game, it's much easier to know players will select playtested spells that the DM is at least somewhat aware of, rather than having a character class whose every leveling up becomes a trust exercise in the player's efforts at innovation. "Game breaking potential" shouldn't be a class function. So, most games that do homebrew well I think, do it with care and a generally conservative approach to innovation.
Could WotC design a "tighter" spell design system? Possible, but that would risk the magic system getting "locked down" by rules parameters and becomes a shackle for even official magic design.
I think magic in all forms could have better design rules, that could also contain the hooks for entire campaigns (as the DM whose longest currently running game was initially predicated on the theme of "magical discovery"), but I could see such rules pulling too much focus from the core rules so imagine such a rules package would be separate optional text, a whole book basically. Frankly this is what Strixhaven should/have could have been, tying mechanics for playing the discovery of new magics in a magical university setting book ... instead of MtG Harry Potter.
Seems kinda thematically redundant. All of the subs are pulling a bit from Rune Knight, and I can't imagine what book this is for if its not a sequel to SKT.
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
Seems kinda thematically redundant. All of the subs are pulling a bit from Rune Knight, and I can't imagine what book this is for if its not a sequel to SKT.
I mean, we have at least 3 dragon-themed subclasses, so I dont think theres an issue with having more than one giant/rune themed subclasses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
I agree with this completely. Especially with the Runecrafter Wizard concepts.
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
I kind of resent that the Runecrafter is a Wizard. Only Cleric has more subs as it is (Cleric has 14 vs. Wizard's 13, next closest is Fighter/Monk at 10), and Artificer is right there, sitting in a lonely corner with its 4 subclasses. It's just another INT caster focused on crafting, tools, knowledge, and creativity, that's also lacking in subs, no big deal.
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
I kind of resent that the Runecrafter is a Wizard. Only Cleric has more subs as it is (Cleric has 14 vs. Wizard's 13, next closest is Fighter/Monk at 10), and Artificer is right there, sitting in a lonely corner with its 4 subclasses. It's just another INT caster focused on crafting, tools, knowledge, and creativity, that's also lacking in subs, no big deal.
Agreed. I guess I know what feedback I’ll be giving them when the survey goes up.
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
I kind of resent that the Runecrafter is a Wizard. Only Cleric has more subs as it is (Cleric has 14 vs. Wizard's 13, next closest is Fighter/Monk at 10), and Artificer is right there, sitting in a lonely corner with its 4 subclasses. It's just another INT caster focused on crafting, tools, knowledge, and creativity, that's also lacking in subs, no big deal.
I feel like if I was going to make it an Artificer, I would make the Runecarver feats from this UA just a baseline feature for that subclass, especially since the Runic Empowerment feature would be weaker on a half-caster. They would also need to come up with some rewrite or rework of the ability thats tied to Arcane Recovery, but I imagine something similar wouldnt be too hard to make.
Im all here for either direction it goes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
. . . Are we getting a Prehistoric campaign setting? Possibly the First World or Dawn War? Because all of these fit with that concept really well.
They're bringing back "Giants are connected to Elementals" like they were with 4e, the Circle of the Primeval gets to summon Mammoths/Dinosaurs to aid them in combat, and Runes are often thought of as a "primitive" sort of magic.
Also, I was totally ahead of WotC with these subclass ideas. I made a Giant subclass for the Barbarian, a Prehistoric subclass for the Druid, and a Runecarver subclass (for the Artificer, though) about a year ago. Nice to see them catching up.
;)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
. . . Are we getting a Prehistoric campaign setting? Possibly the First World or Dawn War? Because all of these fit with that concept really well.
They're bringing back "Giants are connected to Elementals" like they were with 4e, the Circle of the Primeval gets to summon Mammoths/Dinosaurs to aid them in combat, and Runes are often thought of as a "primitive" sort of magic.
Also, I was totally ahead of WotC with these subclass ideas. I made a Giant subclass for the Barbarian, a Prehistoric subclass for the Druid, and a Runecarver subclass (for the Artificer, though) about a year ago. Nice to see them catching up.
;)
I saw someone else suggest another M:tG crossover. I don't play, but apparently they have a very heavily Norse-inflected setting called Kaldheim.
. . . Are we getting a Prehistoric campaign setting? Possibly the First World or Dawn War? Because all of these fit with that concept really well.
They're bringing back "Giants are connected to Elementals" like they were with 4e, the Circle of the Primeval gets to summon Mammoths/Dinosaurs to aid them in combat, and Runes are often thought of as a "primitive" sort of magic.
Also, I was totally ahead of WotC with these subclass ideas. I made a Giant subclass for the Barbarian, a Prehistoric subclass for the Druid, and a Runecarver subclass (for the Artificer, though) about a year ago. Nice to see them catching up.
;)
I saw someone else suggest another M:tG crossover. I don't play, but apparently they have a very heavily Norse-inflected setting called Kaldheim.
(also i remember reading those subs)
Wouldn't Kaldheim have made more sense to bring to 5e last year when it was coming out? Like how Strixhaven was released for both M:tG and D&D at around the same time?
It could be Kaldheim . . . but I'm still guessing a Prehistoric campaign setting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Ravnica came out when Ravnica Allegiance did. Theros likewise came when Theros Beyond Death was released. Same for Strixhaven. Kaldheim would be incredible, but by this speculation its not even remotely likely.
A prehistoric campaign setting doesn't really match the giant theme at all, and I would be very unhappy if it was correct. Actually, maybe not: settings are now three tiny books with less content for double the price, so I wouldn't buy this anyway.
To be completely honest, I think this is not either of those above options. Let's take a deep dive, shall we?
The Krynn book sounds like its actually the summer adventure, not a full setting in and of itself. Is Krynn the setting that will be re-touched on in 2023/2024? I think it could be. That means we'd still need a second setting this year. My wild theory is that its the UA for a Faerun setting book. Yes, it would replace SCAG. Yes, it would not reprint the Arcana Cleric or any of the good subclasses from SCAG because WotC hates counterspell. And, yes, SCAG would become like MToF and VGtM and be discontinued, removing the Ghostwise halfling and several other of the decent options the book presents from the game for the rest of eternity, wiping the DDB versions into digital hell. Plus, if you look at numbers, Faerun is by far one of the most popular settings in the game, so I do not feel like I'm being far-fetched to say that we may be getting it again.
Yes, I am this gloomy in real life too. Go figure.
I'm, and I don't think I'm the only one, not really seeing a SKT sequel anymore than Fizban was a sequel to Tyranny of Dragons. I'm picturing a relatively setting agnostic "multiverse" take on Giants, perhaps tied to the Elemental Planes, or perhaps the Elemental connection is explained loosely and instead more focus is built around creative Giant personalities, lairs, and beastiary of Giants and Giant adjacent monsters, and some Giant spells and magic items. It could be cool if they find that sweet spot of following the Fizban's formula and allowing the book to be it's own. It'll be cool to see what guidance they provide for Giant varieties deviating from their "typical" alignments.
To be completely honest, I think this is not either of those. The Krynn book sounds like its actually the summer adventure, not a full setting in and of itself. Is Krynn the setting that will be re-touched on in 2023/2024? I think it could be. That means we'd still need a second setting this year.
We know when the Dragonlance book is coming out, it's this Fall/Winter, alongside a "battle game," whatever the hell that is. This summer's already full up with Radiant Citadel and Spelljammer in July and August, respectively.
Otherwise, you could be right on a SCAG replacement. I think that book's definitely coming, I'm just not sold that this is related to that. Giants don't feel a big enough part of the Realms to be the only new character options in a Sword Coast sourcebook.
Of course, I also don't think there's enough to Giant for their own Fizban, particularly when they've already got their own adventure book and other related options, while other creature types like Celestials and Constructs and Plants are just, sorta...left out in the cold. Aberrations, Fey, or Fiends are likely the more "iconic" D&D bad guys, so they'd seem more likely to get their own dedicated sourcebook after Dragons did than Giants would. But who knows? I could be very wrong on that.
To be completely honest, I think this is not either of those. The Krynn book sounds like its actually the summer adventure, not a full setting in and of itself. Is Krynn the setting that will be re-touched on in 2023/2024? I think it could be. That means we'd still need a second setting this year.
We know when the Dragonlance book is coming out, it's this Fall/Winter, alongside a "battle game," whatever the hell that is. This summer's already full up with Radiant Citadel and Spelljammer in July and August, respectively.
Otherwise, you could be right on a SCAG replacement. I think that book's definitely coming, I'm just not sold that this is related to that. Giants don't feel a big enough part of the Realms to be the only new character options in a Sword Coast sourcebook.
Of course, I also don't think there's enough to Giant for their own Fizban, particularly when they've already got their own adventure book and other related options, while other creature types like Celestials and Constructs and Plants are just, sorta...left out in the cold. Aberrations, Fey, or Fiends are likely the more "iconic" D&D bad guys, so they'd seem more likely to get their own dedicated sourcebook after Dragons did than Giants would. But who knows? I could be very wrong on that.
Ravnica came out when Ravnica Allegiance did. Theros likewise came when Theros Beyond Death was released. Same for Strixhaven. Kaldheim would be incredible, but by this speculation its not even remotely likely.
Agreed.
A prehistoric campaign setting doesn't really match the giant theme at all, and I would be very unhappy if it was correct.
Okay . . . but what about the Primeval Druid? That's not really "Giant" themed. It's Prehistoric. One of its features is literally named "Prehistoric Conduit".
Also, there's the fact that they're bringing back the "Giants are connected to the Elements" from 4e. Which is heavily tied to the Dawn War (the prehistoric war between Giants and Dragons that took place on a lot of D&D worlds). And the Runecrafter could be their version of a "Prehistoric Wizard", having Runecrafting be the origin of wizardry in D&D.
Actually, maybe not: settings are now three tiny books with less content for double the price, so I wouldn't buy this anyway.
Actually, only Spelljammer is 3 books. And it doesn't "double the price", it increases it by 20 dollars. For a few reasons:
Inflation is crazy right now. And WotC haven't increased the price of their 5e books since the start of this edition, which is really crazy when you think about it.
There is a huge paper shortage.
The book set contains a DM screen, which is normally 10-15 dollars on its own.
Dragonlance (which is coming out at the end of this year) is just one book. I'm assuming that only a few other settings will be formatted similarly to Spelljammer in 5e (Planescape is the most likely to be split into 3 different books like this).
As for the total page count of the Spelljammer book set being amongst the shortest books in D&D 5e . . . yeah, that's not great. I really wish that they had more. But the price hike is justified. At least, it is for the physical version. I'm not sure if the decision to increase the D&D Beyond version up to 50 dollars is a good idea.
The Krynn book sounds like its actually the summer adventure, not a full setting in and of itself.
I disagree. Krynn sounds like a Strixhaven-style book to me. Or Acq. Inc. Still technically a new Setting book, but it also doubles as an adventure book.
Is Krynn the setting that will be re-touched on in 2023/2024? I think it could be. That means we'd still need a second setting this year. My wild theory is that its the UA for a Faerun setting book. Yes, it would replace SCAG. Yes, it would not reprint the Arcana Cleric or any of the good subclasses from SCAG because WotC hates counterspell. And, yes, SCAG would become like MToF and VGtM and be discontinued, removing the Ghostwise halfling and several other of the decent options the book presents from the game for the rest of eternity, wiping the DDB versions into digital hell. Plus, if you look at numbers, Faerun is by far one of the most popular settings in the game, so I do not feel like I'm being far-fetched to say that we may be getting it again.
Well, the SCAG sucks anyway. So discontinuing it would probably be a good thing, if it gets replaced with a better D&D product. However, most of this really doesn't have much to do with the Forgotten Realms specifically. Especially not the Prehistoric stuff in it.
Oh, and we know that 2024 is the year that we're getting a revisited D&D 5e setting book. And this UA is coming out waaaaay too early to signal that product yet (UA normally come out 6-12 months before the book they're going to be released in).
There's really not much connecting this book to the Forgotten Realms.
I would love to see a prehistoric setting. Or a Fizban’s for giants. But there are already four products lined up for the rest of the year—Radiant Citadel, Spelljammer, a new starter set with Dragons of Stormwreck Isle, and Shadow of the Dragon Queen for Dragonlance—so whatever it is it’s unlikely to happen this year.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's a reason a lot of DMs are cautious about homebrew. The homebrew rules don't do a great job of explaining the parameters of spell levels, and the guidelines that are given are easily ignored by homebrewers ... just tour the homebrew spells on this site.
In terms of running the game, it's much easier to know players will select playtested spells that the DM is at least somewhat aware of, rather than having a character class whose every leveling up becomes a trust exercise in the player's efforts at innovation. "Game breaking potential" shouldn't be a class function. So, most games that do homebrew well I think, do it with care and a generally conservative approach to innovation.
Could WotC design a "tighter" spell design system? Possible, but that would risk the magic system getting "locked down" by rules parameters and becomes a shackle for even official magic design.
I think magic in all forms could have better design rules, that could also contain the hooks for entire campaigns (as the DM whose longest currently running game was initially predicated on the theme of "magical discovery"), but I could see such rules pulling too much focus from the core rules so imagine such a rules package would be separate optional text, a whole book basically. Frankly this is what Strixhaven should/have could have been, tying mechanics for playing the discovery of new magics in a magical university setting book ... instead of MtG Harry Potter.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Apparently, we're looking at a sequel to Storm King's Thunder or something.
Oh goodie goodie gumdrops
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Seems kinda thematically redundant. All of the subs are pulling a bit from Rune Knight, and I can't imagine what book this is for if its not a sequel to SKT.
As a fan of the giant monster type; this UA is a love letter.
And kudos to the Runecrafter Wizard not necessarily being limited to giant-magic…celestial words of power, Infernal curse marks, or eldritch babble all become valid character concepts. I cannot wait.
I mean, we have at least 3 dragon-themed subclasses, so I dont think theres an issue with having more than one giant/rune themed subclasses.
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I agree with this completely. Especially with the Runecrafter Wizard concepts.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I kind of resent that the Runecrafter is a Wizard. Only Cleric has more subs as it is (Cleric has 14 vs. Wizard's 13, next closest is Fighter/Monk at 10), and Artificer is right there, sitting in a lonely corner with its 4 subclasses. It's just another INT caster focused on crafting, tools, knowledge, and creativity, that's also lacking in subs, no big deal.
Agreed. I guess I know what feedback I’ll be giving them when the survey goes up.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I feel like if I was going to make it an Artificer, I would make the Runecarver feats from this UA just a baseline feature for that subclass, especially since the Runic Empowerment feature would be weaker on a half-caster. They would also need to come up with some rewrite or rework of the ability thats tied to Arcane Recovery, but I imagine something similar wouldnt be too hard to make.
Im all here for either direction it goes.
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
. . . Are we getting a Prehistoric campaign setting? Possibly the First World or Dawn War? Because all of these fit with that concept really well.
They're bringing back "Giants are connected to Elementals" like they were with 4e, the Circle of the Primeval gets to summon Mammoths/Dinosaurs to aid them in combat, and Runes are often thought of as a "primitive" sort of magic.
Also, I was totally ahead of WotC with these subclass ideas. I made a Giant subclass for the Barbarian, a Prehistoric subclass for the Druid, and a Runecarver subclass (for the Artificer, though) about a year ago. Nice to see them catching up.
;)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I saw someone else suggest another M:tG crossover. I don't play, but apparently they have a very heavily Norse-inflected setting called Kaldheim.
(also i remember reading those subs)
Wouldn't Kaldheim have made more sense to bring to 5e last year when it was coming out? Like how Strixhaven was released for both M:tG and D&D at around the same time?
It could be Kaldheim . . . but I'm still guessing a Prehistoric campaign setting.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Ravnica came out when Ravnica Allegiance did. Theros likewise came when Theros Beyond Death was released. Same for Strixhaven. Kaldheim would be incredible, but by this speculation its not even remotely likely.
A prehistoric campaign setting doesn't really match the giant theme at all, and I would be very unhappy if it was correct. Actually, maybe not: settings are now three tiny books with less content for double the price, so I wouldn't buy this anyway.
To be completely honest, I think this is not either of those above options. Let's take a deep dive, shall we?
The Krynn book sounds like its actually the summer adventure, not a full setting in and of itself. Is Krynn the setting that will be re-touched on in 2023/2024? I think it could be. That means we'd still need a second setting this year. My wild theory is that its the UA for a Faerun setting book. Yes, it would replace SCAG. Yes, it would not reprint the Arcana Cleric or any of the good subclasses from SCAG because WotC hates counterspell. And, yes, SCAG would become like MToF and VGtM and be discontinued, removing the Ghostwise halfling and several other of the decent options the book presents from the game for the rest of eternity, wiping the DDB versions into digital hell. Plus, if you look at numbers, Faerun is by far one of the most popular settings in the game, so I do not feel like I'm being far-fetched to say that we may be getting it again.
Yes, I am this gloomy in real life too. Go figure.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
I'm, and I don't think I'm the only one, not really seeing a SKT sequel anymore than Fizban was a sequel to Tyranny of Dragons. I'm picturing a relatively setting agnostic "multiverse" take on Giants, perhaps tied to the Elemental Planes, or perhaps the Elemental connection is explained loosely and instead more focus is built around creative Giant personalities, lairs, and beastiary of Giants and Giant adjacent monsters, and some Giant spells and magic items. It could be cool if they find that sweet spot of following the Fizban's formula and allowing the book to be it's own. It'll be cool to see what guidance they provide for Giant varieties deviating from their "typical" alignments.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
We know when the Dragonlance book is coming out, it's this Fall/Winter, alongside a "battle game," whatever the hell that is. This summer's already full up with Radiant Citadel and Spelljammer in July and August, respectively.
Otherwise, you could be right on a SCAG replacement. I think that book's definitely coming, I'm just not sold that this is related to that. Giants don't feel a big enough part of the Realms to be the only new character options in a Sword Coast sourcebook.
Of course, I also don't think there's enough to Giant for their own Fizban, particularly when they've already got their own adventure book and other related options, while other creature types like Celestials and Constructs and Plants are just, sorta...left out in the cold. Aberrations, Fey, or Fiends are likely the more "iconic" D&D bad guys, so they'd seem more likely to get their own dedicated sourcebook after Dragons did than Giants would. But who knows? I could be very wrong on that.
Try telling that to WotC. Lore is no law to them!
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Eh, lore is the least important part of these books for me.
Agreed.
Okay . . . but what about the Primeval Druid? That's not really "Giant" themed. It's Prehistoric. One of its features is literally named "Prehistoric Conduit".
Also, there's the fact that they're bringing back the "Giants are connected to the Elements" from 4e. Which is heavily tied to the Dawn War (the prehistoric war between Giants and Dragons that took place on a lot of D&D worlds). And the Runecrafter could be their version of a "Prehistoric Wizard", having Runecrafting be the origin of wizardry in D&D.
Actually, only Spelljammer is 3 books. And it doesn't "double the price", it increases it by 20 dollars. For a few reasons:
Dragonlance (which is coming out at the end of this year) is just one book. I'm assuming that only a few other settings will be formatted similarly to Spelljammer in 5e (Planescape is the most likely to be split into 3 different books like this).
As for the total page count of the Spelljammer book set being amongst the shortest books in D&D 5e . . . yeah, that's not great. I really wish that they had more. But the price hike is justified. At least, it is for the physical version. I'm not sure if the decision to increase the D&D Beyond version up to 50 dollars is a good idea.
I disagree. Krynn sounds like a Strixhaven-style book to me. Or Acq. Inc. Still technically a new Setting book, but it also doubles as an adventure book.
Well, the SCAG sucks anyway. So discontinuing it would probably be a good thing, if it gets replaced with a better D&D product. However, most of this really doesn't have much to do with the Forgotten Realms specifically. Especially not the Prehistoric stuff in it.
Oh, and we know that 2024 is the year that we're getting a revisited D&D 5e setting book. And this UA is coming out waaaaay too early to signal that product yet (UA normally come out 6-12 months before the book they're going to be released in).
There's really not much connecting this book to the Forgotten Realms.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I would love to see a prehistoric setting. Or a Fizban’s for giants. But there are already four products lined up for the rest of the year—Radiant Citadel, Spelljammer, a new starter set with Dragons of Stormwreck Isle, and Shadow of the Dragon Queen for Dragonlance—so whatever it is it’s unlikely to happen this year.