Heh, they're never adding more ability scores. I could see them using Honor as a variant version of Renown, like they're doing in the M:tG settings, but not as an ability score.
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
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
Heh, they're never adding more ability scores. I could see them using Honor as a variant version of Renown, like they're doing in the M:tG settings, but not as an ability score.
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
Like you said, it is “optional.” Like Levi said, D&D will never deviate from the 6 OG ability scores. They tested the market with that back in 2e with the Players’ Options books. I think I was the only person in the world who actually liked the idea, and I’m one of those strange people who actually prefer a “cruncher” rules set. The rest of the world voted instead for “streamlined” as evidenced by the number of players 5e has compared to every other edition of the game.
Heh, they're never adding more ability scores. I could see them using Honor as a variant version of Renown, like they're doing in the M:tG settings, but not as an ability score.
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
Like you said, it is “optional.” Like Levi said, D&D will never deviate from the 6 OG ability scores. They tested the market with that back in 2e with the Players’ Options books. I think I was the only person in the world who actually liked the idea, and I’m one of those strange people who actually prefer a “cruncher” rules set. The rest of the world voted instead for “streamlined” as evidenced by the number of players 5e has compared to every other edition of the game.
Yeah the "Ivory Tower" design from 3e is gone as well with most options being somewhat relatively equal (with a few notable exceptions).
Overall it creates a more streamlined/even experience in general but yeah takes a fair amount of "Crunch" out.
I think one way to make it work is giving some Variant Combat Rules to help add some crunch back and I honestly hope this is on the scope for UA at some point soon.
You mean in addition to the combat options in the DMG I assume. Like what?
Correct. The DMG ones are a good start but more could be very interesting.
I would love to see things like "Weapon Master" where you can do additional abilities with weapons. Whips can trip people or restrain them. Trident can pin people to a spot as part of an attack, flail avoids AC bonus of shield.
That kind of stuff. Also abilities in creatures that activate when they are "bloodied". Like a bear fights more viciously the closer to death it is.
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
Like you said, it is “optional.” Like Levi said, D&D will never deviate from the 6 OG ability scores. They tested the market with that back in 2e with the Players’ Options books. I think I was the only person in the world who actually liked the idea, and I’m one of those strange people who actually prefer a “cruncher” rules set. The rest of the world voted instead for “streamlined” as evidenced by the number of players 5e has compared to every other edition of the game.
just to clarify i am not at all suggesting making the honor variant rule be made "official" and force every character to use it, becuase that would be dumb, just to play arround with this optional rule, perhaps in an setting book or an module in a different setting defined by some kind of honor code, and then create additional optional rules interacting to that optional rule, just saying that "okay dwarves and hobgoblins have +2 honor" and not worry about how precisely it is going to affect balance, just an kinda flavourful mechanic sort of like the sidekicks. Again probably not something they will do but something that would be kinda neat i guess
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
Like you said, it is “optional.” Like Levi said, D&D will never deviate from the 6 OG ability scores. They tested the market with that back in 2e with the Players’ Options books. I think I was the only person in the world who actually liked the idea, and I’m one of those strange people who actually prefer a “cruncher” rules set. The rest of the world voted instead for “streamlined” as evidenced by the number of players 5e has compared to every other edition of the game.
just to clarify i am not at all suggesting making the honor variant rule be made "official" and force every character to use it, becuase that would be dumb, just to play arround with this optional rule, perhaps in an setting book or an module in a different setting defined by some kind of honor code, and then create additional optional rules interacting to that optional rule, just saying that "okay dwarves and hobgoblins have +2 honor" and not worry about how precisely it is going to affect balance, just an kinda flavourful mechanic sort of like the sidekicks. Again probably not something they will do but something that would be kinda neat i guess
I know you don't want to add a new score that is required to be had in the game, but Wizards of the Coast has supported those ability scores as much as they ever will. They mentioned them in the DMG in the Dungeon Master's Workshop section, and will 99% never mention them again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Subclasses Pt. 4...if there are even plans to release such a thing.
Didn’t you hear? I won that bet.
yeah, but that was called psionic options, not subclasses: part 4
Correct, which is precisely the reason I won the bet.
They haven't released a new Wizard subclass, but I assume they're going to either slow down on Wizard subclasses, as we now have 12 official, or they'll wait for a later UA to release a wizard subclass. I don't think they'll do another Wizard subclass, but there is now a gap in the subclass they replaced.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Subclasses Pt. 4...if there are even plans to release such a thing.
Didn’t you hear? I won that bet.
yeah, but that was called psionic options, not subclasses: part 4
Correct, which is precisely the reason I won the bet.
They haven't released a new Wizard subclass, but I assume they're going to either slow down on Wizard subclasses, as we now have 12 official, or they'll wait for a later UA to release a wizard subclass. I don't think they'll do another Wizard subclass, but there is now a gap in the subclass they replaced.
to be fair, most of the wizards subclasses are from the players handbook and are subclasses that represents an very "traditional" wizard, most of the current ones are the same as the "subclasses" we saw in 2e and 3.5e and probably earlier, just with significantly diffrent mechanics, seeing some more wacky wizard subclasses, those that deviate a little from what an wizard is like onomancy, swordsinger, war wizard, theurgy wizard and those critical role subclasses would be very much welcome, even if they already have a lot of them
giving us new druid subclasses, ones that try to expand the druids nice roleplay wise like circle of stars, circle of spores and circle of wildfire are all very much welcome as well
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
I agree with you there, I would very much enjoy more roleplay-rich druid subclasses. I like the druids that focus more on aspects of the natural world rather than just animals, and Spore and Wildfire especially are awesome in my opinion since I'm not so fond of wild shape as a mechanic and I like that I can use its charges for other abilities, similar to Bard and the inspirations.
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.
ya know what would be neat? an arcane ish druid, one who sees ether bardic music or arcane magic in general as just another part of nature itself, sort of like the wildfire and spores druids, but one who still does not quite study it like a wizard or bard might. Maybe it is a little too similar to the arcana cleric, but i think it could work out quite nicely if given lore and mechanics that sort of make sense and are interesting enough. Perhaps you could even make it a little dragon themed, with how they are the most common innate spellcasterss in the natural world. Maybe this would make more sense as an proper bard subclass, since bard already has a bunch of nature themed spells like plant growth, speak with plants, speak with animals, animal messenger, awaken etc.
i feel like the newer subclasses tend to be a bit wackier, like they are testing the waters of what the different classes can and cannot be, especially with the arcana cleric, spore druid, wild soul barbarian, as 5e gets older its subclasses will probably get more and more interesting
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
That kind of sounds like the Land druid to me, but maybe I'm not thinking deep enough.
I want another dark druid. Circle of Midnight, a ghost/ethereal druid would be super cool.
Also, something along the lines of a "Blighter" would be cool as well. Basically an "AntiDruid".
question is: how do you motivate the existance of an blighter, one who seeks to detroy nature, when druids draw their power from nature? why would you ever seek to destroy the main source of your power?
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
That kind of sounds like the Land druid to me, but maybe I'm not thinking deep enough.
I want another dark druid. Circle of Midnight, a ghost/ethereal druid would be super cool.
Also, something along the lines of a "Blighter" would be cool as well. Basically an "AntiDruid".
question is: how do you motivate the existance of an blighter, one who seeks to detroy nature, when druids draw their power from nature? why would you ever seek to destroy the main source of your power?
Blighters don’t “seek to destroy nature” exactly. On Athas, Magic gets pulled from the world around you no matter what. Preservers only take what they need. Lighters just don’t care so they take too much and parch the planet. It’s not necessarily intentional, just collateral damage that they are perfectly okay with.
That kind of sounds like the Land druid to me, but maybe I'm not thinking deep enough.
I want another dark druid. Circle of Midnight, a ghost/ethereal druid would be super cool.
Also, something along the lines of a "Blighter" would be cool as well. Basically an "AntiDruid".
question is: how do you motivate the existance of an blighter, one who seeks to detroy nature, when druids draw their power from nature? why would you ever seek to destroy the main source of your power?
Blighters don’t “seek to destroy nature” exactly. On Athas, Magic gets pulled from the world around you no matter what. Preservers only take what they need. Lighters just don’t care so they take too much and parch the planet. It’s not necessarily intentional, just collateral damage that they are perfectly okay with.
oh yeah becuase humans are stupid idiots and would absolutely destory their main source of power for short term profit irl, makes sense
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What final subclasses?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
they have already added honor as an ability score in the dungeon masters guide, it is in the dungeon masters workshop section of the book, on page 264. This is also where they introduced sanity as an ability score.... This is not a new thing i am suggesting, it is an rule that already exists in 5e....
It is an optional rule, but i think it would be fun if we got a few variants that interacts with that optional rule, for instance maybe an option where honor is used as an casting stat for certain warlocks and paladins (due to how the honor abillity score works this could make their spells very powerful), or where dwarves get an bonus to honor alongside their other scores (this would not break the game since honor can be raised and lowered due to the players behaviour), who knows, maybe they will reprint this optional rule and provide it in an setting where it makes a lot of sense to have it
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
Like you said, it is “optional.” Like Levi said, D&D will never deviate from the 6 OG ability scores. They tested the market with that back in 2e with the Players’ Options books. I think I was the only person in the world who actually liked the idea, and I’m one of those strange people who actually prefer a “cruncher” rules set. The rest of the world voted instead for “streamlined” as evidenced by the number of players 5e has compared to every other edition of the game.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Subclasses Pt. 4...if there are even plans to release such a thing.
Didn’t you hear? I won that bet.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah the "Ivory Tower" design from 3e is gone as well with most options being somewhat relatively equal (with a few notable exceptions).
Overall it creates a more streamlined/even experience in general but yeah takes a fair amount of "Crunch" out.
I think one way to make it work is giving some Variant Combat Rules to help add some crunch back and I honestly hope this is on the scope for UA at some point soon.
You mean in addition to the combat options in the DMG I assume. Like what?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Correct. The DMG ones are a good start but more could be very interesting.
I would love to see things like "Weapon Master" where you can do additional abilities with weapons. Whips can trip people or restrain them. Trident can pin people to a spot as part of an attack, flail avoids AC bonus of shield.
That kind of stuff. Also abilities in creatures that activate when they are "bloodied". Like a bear fights more viciously the closer to death it is.
just to clarify i am not at all suggesting making the honor variant rule be made "official" and force every character to use it, becuase that would be dumb, just to play arround with this optional rule, perhaps in an setting book or an module in a different setting defined by some kind of honor code, and then create additional optional rules interacting to that optional rule, just saying that "okay dwarves and hobgoblins have +2 honor" and not worry about how precisely it is going to affect balance, just an kinda flavourful mechanic sort of like the sidekicks. Again probably not something they will do but something that would be kinda neat i guess
yeah, but that was called psionic options, not subclasses: part 4
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
Correct, which is precisely the reason I won the bet.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I know you don't want to add a new score that is required to be had in the game, but Wizards of the Coast has supported those ability scores as much as they ever will. They mentioned them in the DMG in the Dungeon Master's Workshop section, and will 99% never mention them again.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
They haven't released a new Wizard subclass, but I assume they're going to either slow down on Wizard subclasses, as we now have 12 official, or they'll wait for a later UA to release a wizard subclass. I don't think they'll do another Wizard subclass, but there is now a gap in the subclass they replaced.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
to be fair, most of the wizards subclasses are from the players handbook and are subclasses that represents an very "traditional" wizard, most of the current ones are the same as the "subclasses" we saw in 2e and 3.5e and probably earlier, just with significantly diffrent mechanics, seeing some more wacky wizard subclasses, those that deviate a little from what an wizard is like onomancy, swordsinger, war wizard, theurgy wizard and those critical role subclasses would be very much welcome, even if they already have a lot of them
giving us new druid subclasses, ones that try to expand the druids nice roleplay wise like circle of stars, circle of spores and circle of wildfire are all very much welcome as well
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 agree with you there, I would very much enjoy more roleplay-rich druid subclasses. I like the druids that focus more on aspects of the natural world rather than just animals, and Spore and Wildfire especially are awesome in my opinion since I'm not so fond of wild shape as a mechanic and I like that I can use its charges for other abilities, similar to Bard and the inspirations.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
ya know what would be neat? an arcane ish druid, one who sees ether bardic music or arcane magic in general as just another part of nature itself, sort of like the wildfire and spores druids, but one who still does not quite study it like a wizard or bard might. Maybe it is a little too similar to the arcana cleric, but i think it could work out quite nicely if given lore and mechanics that sort of make sense and are interesting enough. Perhaps you could even make it a little dragon themed, with how they are the most common innate spellcasterss in the natural world. Maybe this would make more sense as an proper bard subclass, since bard already has a bunch of nature themed spells like plant growth, speak with plants, speak with animals, animal messenger, awaken etc.
i feel like the newer subclasses tend to be a bit wackier, like they are testing the waters of what the different classes can and cannot be, especially with the arcana cleric, spore druid, wild soul barbarian, as 5e gets older its subclasses will probably get more and more interesting
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
That kind of sounds like the Land druid to me, but maybe I'm not thinking deep enough.
I want another dark druid. Circle of Midnight, a ghost/ethereal druid would be super cool.
Also, something along the lines of a "Blighter" would be cool as well. Basically an "AntiDruid".
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Hm. It would be hard to differentiate it from Arcana Cleric for sure, but I don't think it would be a wholly bad idea.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
question is: how do you motivate the existance of an blighter, one who seeks to detroy nature, when druids draw their power from nature? why would you ever seek to destroy the main source of your power?
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
Blighters don’t “seek to destroy nature” exactly. On Athas, Magic gets pulled from the world around you no matter what. Preservers only take what they need. Lighters just don’t care so they take too much and parch the planet. It’s not necessarily intentional, just collateral damage that they are perfectly okay with.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
oh yeah becuase humans are stupid idiots and would absolutely destory their main source of power for short term profit irl, makes sense
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