Yeah Loxodon or Lizardfolk can work. Also Tortle of course!
Lizardfolk for the AC is a touch pointless for a Strength Monk unless you're planning on Wisdom less than 16, especially since you'll gain a bonus to Wisdom. At that point, you might as well dip barbarian for a monk with a temper. Tortle is a decent option, particularly since that'll be close to your AC cap anyway and it grabs +2 to strength and +1 to wisdom. Loxodon at least means that you can get extra HP while bumping your AC. Warforged is a decent option since the +1 to AC doesn't require armor to work. Set your dex to 14 and your wis to 16 and you'll have 15 AC +1 from Warforged for 16. If you can afford the extra ASI, you can bump dex to 16 or wis to 18 to get 17. Unlike the others aside from Tortle, you can start with a 16 strength. The Simic Hybrid has an option at 5th level to also pick up a +1 if you aren't wearing heavy armor and can get the 16 strength to start.
The constitution bonus of +2 for these options aside from Tortle means that you can skimp there and still have a reasonable constitution while getting your other stats where you want them. It's not as nice as Tortle grabbing +2 strength and +1 wisdom if you want 16s for both to start but it does add some flexibility.
Yeah Loxodon or Lizardfolk can work. Also Tortle of course!
Lizardfolk for the AC is a touch pointless for a Strength Monk unless you're planning on Wisdom less than 16, especially since you'll gain a bonus to Wisdom. At that point, you might as well dip barbarian for a monk with a temper. Tortle is a decent option, particularly since that'll be close to your AC cap anyway and it grabs +2 to strength and +1 to wisdom. Loxodon at least means that you can get extra HP while bumping your AC. Warforged is a decent option since the +1 to AC doesn't require armor to work. Set your dex to 14 and your wis to 16 and you'll have 15 AC +1 from Warforged for 16. If you can afford the extra ASI, you can bump dex to 16 or wis to 18 to get 17. Unlike the others aside from Tortle, you can start with a 16 strength. The Simic Hybrid has an option at 5th level to also pick up a +1 if you aren't wearing heavy armor and can get the 16 strength to start.
The constitution bonus of +2 for these options aside from Tortle means that you can skimp there and still have a reasonable constitution while getting your other stats where you want them. It's not as nice as Tortle grabbing +2 strength and +1 wisdom if you want 16s for both to start but it does add some flexibility.
going for an level 1 monk dip with lizardfolk might actiually be worth it since their d6 natural weapon can then be used as a bonus action
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 other thing I find funny is people say the Brute was too much like Barbarian....
But then we have Rune Knight that basically gives rage with Giant Might:
You can imbue yourself with the might of giants. As a bonus action, you magically gain the following benefits, which last for 1 minute:
If you are smaller than Large, you become Large, along with anything you are wearing. If you lack the room to become Large, your size doesn’t change.
You have advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. (Literally the same in Rage)
Your weapon attacks deal an extra 1d6 damage. (average 3.5 damage increase per attack which is actually better than rage damage at this level!)
The runes then give pretty much several Barbarian Features:
Hill Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action, gaining resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage (Rage has BPS resistance) Frost Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action to increase your Strength score by 2 for 10 minutes. This increase can cause your score to exceed 20, but not 30. Once you invoke the rune, you can’t do so again until you finish a short or long rest. (Barbarian Capstone)
Brute was a copy of barb? This pretty much steals most of the features and got literally no flak for it.
The other thing I find funny is people say the Brute was too much like Barbarian....
But then we have Rune Knight that basically gives rage with Giant Might:
You can imbue yourself with the might of giants. As a bonus action, you magically gain the following benefits, which last for 1 minute:
If you are smaller than Large, you become Large, along with anything you are wearing. If you lack the room to become Large, your size doesn’t change.
You have advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. (Literally the same in Rage)
Your weapon attacks deal an extra 1d6 damage. (average 3.5 damage increase per attack which is actually better than rage damage at this level!)
The runes then give pretty much several Barbarian Features:
Hill Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action, gaining resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage (Rage has BPS resistance) Frost Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action to increase your Strength score by 2 for 10 minutes. This increase can cause your score to exceed 20, but not 30. Once you invoke the rune, you can’t do so again until you finish a short or long rest. (Barbarian Capstone)
Brute was a copy of barb? This pretty much steals most of the features and got literally no flak for it.
i would call the giant might feature more an successor to the giant sorcerer and the giant form mystic discipline, rather than a ripoff of rage, and it is meant to be based of the giants so it makes sense that it is perhaps a bit more savage, while still making sense and being a bit more unique, it is an rune using intelegence caster and that cannot be further from the barbarians whole gig of being angry, wheras the brute was such a departure from the fighter and its lore and was too similar in lore to the barbarian
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 would call the giant might feature more an successor to the giant sorcerer and the giant form mystic discipline, rather than a ripoff of rage, and it is meant to be based of the giants so it makes sense that it is perhaps a bit more savage, while still making sense and being a bit more unique, it is an rune using intelegence caster and that cannot be further from the barbarians whole gig of being angry, wheras the brute was such a departure from the fighter and its lore and was too similar in lore to the barbarian
Mechanically they are near identical...it can't hide blatant feature rip off behind flavor. Brute could have altered its flavor a bit and been mechanically very different than barbarian while this fighter has features that mirror the barbarian play style.
Its funny how a more blatant rip off is excused due to "flavor".
i would call the giant might feature more an successor to the giant sorcerer and the giant form mystic discipline, rather than a ripoff of rage, and it is meant to be based of the giants so it makes sense that it is perhaps a bit more savage, while still making sense and being a bit more unique, it is an rune using intelegence caster and that cannot be further from the barbarians whole gig of being angry, wheras the brute was such a departure from the fighter and its lore and was too similar in lore to the barbarian
Mechanically they are near identical...it can't hide blatant feature rip off behind flavor. Brute could have altered its flavor a bit and been mechanically very different than barbarian while this fighter has features that mirror the barbarian play style.
Its funny how a more blatant rip off is excused due to "flavor".
again it is not ripping off barbarian, i would call the effect more similar to the enlarge effect of the enlarge / reduce spell
Enlarge:
-you increase your size by one category
-you have advantage on strength checks and strength saving throws
-you deal an extra 1d4 damage with all attacks
this spell, from getting bonus damage in the form of an dice expression, to increasing size and giving advantage to strength stuff is what the effect is most likely trying to emulate, heck you even get it at level 7, the same level that most third casters like eldrich knights and arcane tricksters get access to 2nd level spells jsut like enlarge / reduce. It is not trying to copy the barbarian, it is not trying to copy rage, it is trying to copy an spell and the UA sorcerer's abillity to also become really big
likewise the frost giant feature does that proably becuase many giants have strength scores above 20, in fact most of them do. Hill giants do not have any particular resistances but are known for being resillient and honestly there is not much you really can do in terms of magical effects with the hill giant
And what about the other effects, like the abillity to redirect attacks, restrain opponents with fiery chains, and hypnotize? that is not exactly an very barbarian-esque thing, nor is expertise in tools
Agree to disagree as it literally pulls every aspect from Rage:
ADV to STR based checks/saves BPS Resistance Extra Damage on attacks
the giant might feature itself is much closer to the enlarge effect than to rage, you dont get resistance from it, that is a sepperate rune that does that, it uses an dice expression to describe the bonus damage instead of an static damage modifier like rage, and rage does not make you big, and to top it of you get it at the exact same time as an wizard would unlock it, and it make sense becuase you are a dude who fights things while using magic that is related to giants, creatures who are big
and what about the other things? hypnotisim, chains of fire, redirecting attacks against other people, becoming an master artisan and predicting the future are all so very barbarian-y features. The rune mage is a dude who has a sword and some magic, he is no more mechanically similar to an barbarian than what an brute is
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
Agree to disagree as it literally pulls every aspect from Rage:
ADV to STR based checks/saves BPS Resistance Extra Damage on attacks
the giant might feature itself is much closer to the enlarge effect than to rage, you dont get resistance from it, that is a sepperate rune that does that, it uses an dice expression to describe the bonus damage instead of an static damage modifier like rage, and rage does not make you big, and to top it of you get it at the exact same time as an wizard would unlock it, and it make sense becuase you are a dude who fights things while using magic that is related to giants, creatures who are big
and what about the other things? hypnotisim, chains of fire, redirecting attacks against other people, becoming an master artisan and predicting the future are all so very barbarian-y features. The rune mage is a dude who has a sword and some magic, he is no more mechanically similar to an barbarian than what an brute is
You're right they can get much much more than a Barb can while having all their features!
It's a vastly overpowered subclass. Just crazy how much it gets and still copies from Barb
Agree to disagree as it literally pulls every aspect from Rage:
ADV to STR based checks/saves BPS Resistance Extra Damage on attacks
the giant might feature itself is much closer to the enlarge effect than to rage, you dont get resistance from it, that is a sepperate rune that does that, it uses an dice expression to describe the bonus damage instead of an static damage modifier like rage, and rage does not make you big, and to top it of you get it at the exact same time as an wizard would unlock it, and it make sense becuase you are a dude who fights things while using magic that is related to giants, creatures who are big
and what about the other things? hypnotisim, chains of fire, redirecting attacks against other people, becoming an master artisan and predicting the future are all so very barbarian-y features. The rune mage is a dude who has a sword and some magic, he is no more mechanically similar to an barbarian than what an brute is
You're right they can get much much more than a Barb can while having all their features!
It's a vastly overpowered subclass. Just crazy how much it gets and still copies from Barb
Enlarge/Reduce does the following when set to the enlarge effect:
increases your size by one category, for most melee focused player characters this means going from medium to large
attacks deal an extra 1d4 damage
advantage on strength saves and checks
magical effect, does not work in anti magic field
Giant might does the following:
increases your size to large by default
attacks deal an extra 1d6 damage
advantage on strength saves and checks
magical effect, does not work in anti magic field
rage does the following:
attacks get an static bonus to damage (+2 at early levels)
advantage on strength saves and checks
resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage
giants might will on its own overlap massively with enlarge in how exactly it works, from using an dice expression instead of an static modifier to damage to not granting you any resistances at all unlike rage. They share some things, just like how rage shares some things with enlarge, but .
and beyond that the barbarian will still be able to easily outtank and outspeed the typical giant fighter with how they get a speed boost and how many primal paths and totem options also make you similarly a very speedy boi, and add to that brutal critical and their fantastic reflexes as shown in feral instinct and danger sense
also the hill giant rune is optional, will compete with giant's might for your bonus action so at the start of combat you need to choose between them and it is once per short rest, so it can be used in more combats overall but cannot be used more than once in a single combat unlike giant's might and rage
And what about the 7th level feature, letting you protect your allies from harm similar to defensive duelist, again it is nothing like any of the barbarians features
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
You only need 3 levels and one Rune to mimic Rage plus get all the fighter features. Its just a copy of the features I dont know what else to say.
Beyond that the 7th level is similar to Ancestrial Barbarian (2d6 reduction of damage on a reaction) except its better because you can just avoid the damage altogether with a resource less way of invoking AC increase on someone else (Also way overpowered)
On top of this you get another Rune! This subclass is so broken its not even funny but Brute was touted as "broken" for extra damage? Its 7th level feature let it add a d6 to its own saves....it pales in comparison to having a resourceless way of adding up to +6 AC to a friend as a reaction and having a rune that can give perma ADV to two skill checks and a short rest ability that is also amazing.
You only need 3 levels and one Rune to mimic Rage plus get all the fighter features. Its just a copy of the features I dont know what else to say.
Beyond that the 7th level is similar to Ancestrial Barbarian (2d6 reduction of damage on a reaction) except its better because you can just avoid the damage altogether with a resource less way of invoking AC increase on someone else (Also way overpowered)
On top of this you get another Rune! This subclass is so broken its not even funny but Brute was touted as "broken" for extra damage? Its 7th level feature let it add a d6 to its own saves....it pales in comparison to having a resourceless way of adding up to +6 AC to a friend as a reaction and having a rune that can give perma ADV to two skill checks and a short rest ability that is also amazing.
[redacted]
this is what giant might and the enlarge effect share with each other:
both increase your size, typically from medium to large
both deal extra damage in the form of an dice expression, this will be rather diffrent compared to having an passive buff as it gives an bell curve effect to damage, making extremely high or low damage rolls less likely and the average more likely
both are only available starting at level 3
both grant advantage on strength saving throws and abillity checks
both are magical effects
neither of them prevents you from casting spells
this is what giant growth and rage share with eachother:
having a boost to damage
advantage on strength checks and saving throws
here is a few key differences between rage and giant growth:
rage completely prevents spellcasting and concentrating on spells
rage is completely nonmagical
it is available as soon as level 1
rage grants resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage. By the time you reach 3rd level you have three rages per long rest and the bear totem barbarian gets resistance to everything
unearthed arcana material, especially later unearthed arcana material, is intentionally made a little powerful since it is easier to nerf something powerful. The brute is considered powerful becuase it gave an passive buff straight to damage that is always active, something that is rather dangerous in the hands of an fighter and something that makes the ranger feel even more like a joke. Calling the hill giant rune a little too barbarian esque with what it does, that i can get behind, giving it an more unique feature would be nice, maybe an feature that lets you yeet things like in the storm sorcerer UA. Trying to say that the rune knight was actively trying to copy the barbarian to produce some kind of barbarian-fighter hybrid with rage and all features is absurd and more than a little dishonest.
Another thing that is dishonest is trying to compare the 7th level feature to the ancestral guardian, at least use an valid comparison like trying to compare it to the cutting words or combat inspiration features of the valor and lore bards, both of whom can add their bardic inspiration die to reduce an opponents attack roll or their damage roll by an amount equal to an roll of their bardic inspiration dice. If wizards of the coast finds both of those reactions to be of roughly equal utillity, then i feel that ancestral protectors is just as powerful as defensive runes, especially since ancestral guardians get their feature earlier and the feaature can reduce damage from any source, even traps or spells wheras the fighter feature only works on attack rolls and is only as good as how much the fighter spent in intelegence, shure you might have a +6 at level 7 if you use both of your abillity score increases on intelegence and your race boosts intelegence and you put a starting value of 15 in it, but who exactly is going to do that when dex boosts both AC and your damage and your accuracy depending on build and there are so many good feats to pick and when constiution is an really important abillity score. If you wanna protect your friends and spec into intelegence, go for it, but it might not be the best option for you
And remember, you will only ever be able to use three runes at one time if you have a weapon in both hands or a shield plus some armor, it is not as broken as you say it is, yes it might need some refinement (that is why it is playtest material), it is very possible that ether the rune knight has currently been scrapped or it might soon be seen in official material or be seen in a new revision, we dont know. [redacted]
Public Mod Note
(MellieDM):
We welcome discussion and dissenting conversations about D&D, but please refrain from personal commentary. Thank you!
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
It's literally the same things as barbarian...I mean the enlarge spell and Barb share things too but the fact they have almost the exact same wording and effects isn't even debating it's just fact.
Rune Knight basically gets Shield spell (except better because you can choose whomever in 60ft) infinitely for free. On top of that they get a rune with permanent bonuses plus a short rest ability. Even if they have to swap a rune out to get the effect they want it's still far and away better than any level 7 fighter feature and it's not even close.
My issue is that "flavor" makes people seemingly blind to terrible balance of mechanics. Brute was a fine subclass that got deemed "broken" despite no real evidence to the fact.
Yes the flavor was a bit on the boring side and the higher level features needed some tweaking but the overwhelming vitrol for the Subclass doomed it.
Then they go and release something so bloated with powerful features but it gets nothing but love and calls for it to be printed as is.
Overall I'm resigned to the fact I will have to run the brute as Homebrew.
Also your language is not appreciated. So good day to you and I hope your day is as pleasant as you are.....
It's literally the same things as barbarian...I mean the enlarge spell and Barb share things too but the fact they have almost the exact same wording and effects isn't even debating it's just fact.
[redacted]
Enlarge and Giant might have almost identical effects, like Giant might has a slightly diffrent way of changing size (but to an medium creature it will be the same) whilst being a little bit less descriptive in exactly how much your height and weight increases, and giant growth has an slightly bigger dice. That is all the differences between them.
Giant growth and rage have effects similar enough to at least be compared, but not nearly the same, rage has a flat bonus, Giant growth has an variable damage bonus, rage gives resistances, giant growth does not, rage can be ended early, both intentionally or otherwise, giant growth cannot, rage is not magical, giant growth is, rage cannot be used in heavy armor, giant growth can, rage prevents concentration and spellcasting, giant growth does not.
Considering how damm similar Enlarge is to Giant might, i think it is more likely that the designers thought okay, we have this arcane magic fighter related to giants, and we have this arcane spell that makes people large and lets them deal extra damage, so how about we make the rune knight feature an ever so slightly stronger version of that spell rather than it going okay how about we take rage, and then we change almost everything that makes rage rage.
the end results may be similar, some advantage on strength checks and some extra damage, but you have to admit, it is more likely that the feature is based on enlarge/ reduce, rather than rage
Also your language is not appreciated. So good day to you and I hope your day is as pleasant as you are.....
eh my day has been fine, you have been frustrating as all hell to talk to, but i have better thing to do than to argue with you, if you wanna belive that giant form or whatever is based of rage, no matter how unlikely that belief is, then i probably have more important things to do than to convice you of anything else
Public Mod Note
(MellieDM):
We welcome discussion and dissenting conversations about D&D, but please refrain from personal commentary. Thank you!
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 don't think that it's hypocritical to like a giant based rune carving fighter subclass with half a brain instead of a stupid barbarian-based brute fighter subclass.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I'll miss brute as someone who just wanted to play an ordinary Joe fighter whose one talent is they hit things on average a bit harder than most. Brute was, in my opinion, the most generally applicable fighter subclass.
Champion does nothing for me. I'm not into crit fishing, being marginally better at physical skills I'm already mediocre at isn't too big a concern, and most campaigns won't make it to level 10 enough for a second fighting style to matter.
Then you miss the entire point my post and only prove my point that the focus is is on "Flavor" over mechanical balance.
You focus only on the "Flavor" of the classes and not the particular issues they were criticized, particularly the mechanical balance and perception of what is "Broken" mechanically.
Rune Knight is in a much greater need for mechanical balancing and "nerfing" than brute ever was.
I really enjoy the flavor of them both and honestly Barbarian doesnt get to own the "tough figther" cliche anymore than Ranger gets to own the master of the land cliche now that Scout Rogue is a thing.
I didn't miss your post, but the abilities you're arguing are a rip off of the barbarian are not meant to be a rip off of the barbarian. Also, the similarities end after 3rd level.
I did focus only on flavor in my last post, because even if at level 3 they accomplish very similar things, the flavor is what makes people like the early level Rune Knight so much more than the Brute. Brute just seemed too similar to the Champion and Barbarian for the community's liking (not saying I didn't like it, I did), so they abandoned it.
Rune Knight does function similarly at level 3 (even though it is more powerful) and does need some nerfing. As has been stated many times on many threads, they have said that they purposely make the UA's too powerful so that they can nerf them later. Whether or not this statement makes sense or is even true is up for debate, but that's what Jeremy Crawford said.
Yes, I agree that classes don't own their niche of D&D, but the community and Wizards tends to disagree with that. Scout Rogue exists, and is better at being a ranger than the ranger ever will be, but that doesn't mean that it's encroaching on the Ranger's territory just because it can accomplish similar things and is cooler.
Sure, at level 3, the Rune Knight can mechanically be a better Brute for awhile, but once you get to the later abilities, it becomes abundantly clear that it isn't a rip off of the Brute. Whether or not they took inspiration from the barbarian or Brute subclass is something we may never know. The fact is that they are similar at the base level, but end up very different.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yeah Loxodon or Lizardfolk can work. Also Tortle of course!
Lizardfolk for the AC is a touch pointless for a Strength Monk unless you're planning on Wisdom less than 16, especially since you'll gain a bonus to Wisdom. At that point, you might as well dip barbarian for a monk with a temper. Tortle is a decent option, particularly since that'll be close to your AC cap anyway and it grabs +2 to strength and +1 to wisdom. Loxodon at least means that you can get extra HP while bumping your AC. Warforged is a decent option since the +1 to AC doesn't require armor to work. Set your dex to 14 and your wis to 16 and you'll have 15 AC +1 from Warforged for 16. If you can afford the extra ASI, you can bump dex to 16 or wis to 18 to get 17. Unlike the others aside from Tortle, you can start with a 16 strength. The Simic Hybrid has an option at 5th level to also pick up a +1 if you aren't wearing heavy armor and can get the 16 strength to start.
The constitution bonus of +2 for these options aside from Tortle means that you can skimp there and still have a reasonable constitution while getting your other stats where you want them. It's not as nice as Tortle grabbing +2 strength and +1 wisdom if you want 16s for both to start but it does add some flexibility.
going for an level 1 monk dip with lizardfolk might actiually be worth it since their d6 natural weapon can then be used as a bonus action
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 other thing I find funny is people say the Brute was too much like Barbarian....
But then we have Rune Knight that basically gives rage with Giant Might:
You can imbue yourself with the might of giants. As a bonus action, you magically gain the following benefits, which last for 1 minute:
The runes then give pretty much several Barbarian Features:
Hill Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action, gaining resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage (Rage has BPS resistance)
Frost Giant: In addition, you can invoke the rune as a bonus action to increase your Strength score by 2 for 10 minutes. This increase can cause your score to exceed 20, but not 30. Once you invoke the rune, you can’t do so again until you finish a short or long rest. (Barbarian Capstone)
Brute was a copy of barb? This pretty much steals most of the features and got literally no flak for it.
i would call the giant might feature more an successor to the giant sorcerer and the giant form mystic discipline, rather than a ripoff of rage, and it is meant to be based of the giants so it makes sense that it is perhaps a bit more savage, while still making sense and being a bit more unique, it is an rune using intelegence caster and that cannot be further from the barbarians whole gig of being angry, wheras the brute was such a departure from the fighter and its lore and was too similar in lore to the barbarian
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
Mechanically they are near identical...it can't hide blatant feature rip off behind flavor. Brute could have altered its flavor a bit and been mechanically very different than barbarian while this fighter has features that mirror the barbarian play style.
Its funny how a more blatant rip off is excused due to "flavor".
again it is not ripping off barbarian, i would call the effect more similar to the enlarge effect of the enlarge / reduce spell
Enlarge:
-you increase your size by one category
-you have advantage on strength checks and strength saving throws
-you deal an extra 1d4 damage with all attacks
this spell, from getting bonus damage in the form of an dice expression, to increasing size and giving advantage to strength stuff is what the effect is most likely trying to emulate, heck you even get it at level 7, the same level that most third casters like eldrich knights and arcane tricksters get access to 2nd level spells jsut like enlarge / reduce. It is not trying to copy the barbarian, it is not trying to copy rage, it is trying to copy an spell and the UA sorcerer's abillity to also become really big
likewise the frost giant feature does that proably becuase many giants have strength scores above 20, in fact most of them do. Hill giants do not have any particular resistances but are known for being resillient and honestly there is not much you really can do in terms of magical effects with the hill giant
And what about the other effects, like the abillity to redirect attacks, restrain opponents with fiery chains, and hypnotize? that is not exactly an very barbarian-esque thing, nor is expertise in tools
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
Agree to disagree as it literally pulls every aspect from Rage:
ADV to STR based checks/saves
BPS Resistance
Extra Damage on attacks
the giant might feature itself is much closer to the enlarge effect than to rage, you dont get resistance from it, that is a sepperate rune that does that, it uses an dice expression to describe the bonus damage instead of an static damage modifier like rage, and rage does not make you big, and to top it of you get it at the exact same time as an wizard would unlock it, and it make sense becuase you are a dude who fights things while using magic that is related to giants, creatures who are big
and what about the other things? hypnotisim, chains of fire, redirecting attacks against other people, becoming an master artisan and predicting the future are all so very barbarian-y features. The rune mage is a dude who has a sword and some magic, he is no more mechanically similar to an barbarian than what an brute is
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
You're right they can get much much more than a Barb can while having all their features!
It's a vastly overpowered subclass. Just crazy how much it gets and still copies from Barb
Enlarge/Reduce does the following when set to the enlarge effect:
Giant might does the following:
rage does the following:
giants might will on its own overlap massively with enlarge in how exactly it works, from using an dice expression instead of an static modifier to damage to not granting you any resistances at all unlike rage. They share some things, just like how rage shares some things with enlarge, but .
and beyond that the barbarian will still be able to easily outtank and outspeed the typical giant fighter with how they get a speed boost and how many primal paths and totem options also make you similarly a very speedy boi, and add to that brutal critical and their fantastic reflexes as shown in feral instinct and danger sense
also the hill giant rune is optional, will compete with giant's might for your bonus action so at the start of combat you need to choose between them and it is once per short rest, so it can be used in more combats overall but cannot be used more than once in a single combat unlike giant's might and rage
And what about the 7th level feature, letting you protect your allies from harm similar to defensive duelist, again it is nothing like any of the barbarians features
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
You only need 3 levels and one Rune to mimic Rage plus get all the fighter features. Its just a copy of the features I dont know what else to say.
Beyond that the 7th level is similar to Ancestrial Barbarian (2d6 reduction of damage on a reaction) except its better because you can just avoid the damage altogether with a resource less way of invoking AC increase on someone else (Also way overpowered)
On top of this you get another Rune! This subclass is so broken its not even funny but Brute was touted as "broken" for extra damage? Its 7th level feature let it add a d6 to its own saves....it pales in comparison to having a resourceless way of adding up to +6 AC to a friend as a reaction and having a rune that can give perma ADV to two skill checks and a short rest ability that is also amazing.
[redacted]
this is what giant might and the enlarge effect share with each other:
this is what giant growth and rage share with eachother:
here is a few key differences between rage and giant growth:
unearthed arcana material, especially later unearthed arcana material, is intentionally made a little powerful since it is easier to nerf something powerful. The brute is considered powerful becuase it gave an passive buff straight to damage that is always active, something that is rather dangerous in the hands of an fighter and something that makes the ranger feel even more like a joke. Calling the hill giant rune a little too barbarian esque with what it does, that i can get behind, giving it an more unique feature would be nice, maybe an feature that lets you yeet things like in the storm sorcerer UA. Trying to say that the rune knight was actively trying to copy the barbarian to produce some kind of barbarian-fighter hybrid with rage and all features is absurd and more than a little dishonest.
Another thing that is dishonest is trying to compare the 7th level feature to the ancestral guardian, at least use an valid comparison like trying to compare it to the cutting words or combat inspiration features of the valor and lore bards, both of whom can add their bardic inspiration die to reduce an opponents attack roll or their damage roll by an amount equal to an roll of their bardic inspiration dice. If wizards of the coast finds both of those reactions to be of roughly equal utillity, then i feel that ancestral protectors is just as powerful as defensive runes, especially since ancestral guardians get their feature earlier and the feaature can reduce damage from any source, even traps or spells wheras the fighter feature only works on attack rolls and is only as good as how much the fighter spent in intelegence, shure you might have a +6 at level 7 if you use both of your abillity score increases on intelegence and your race boosts intelegence and you put a starting value of 15 in it, but who exactly is going to do that when dex boosts both AC and your damage and your accuracy depending on build and there are so many good feats to pick and when constiution is an really important abillity score. If you wanna protect your friends and spec into intelegence, go for it, but it might not be the best option for you
And remember, you will only ever be able to use three runes at one time if you have a weapon in both hands or a shield plus some armor, it is not as broken as you say it is, yes it might need some refinement (that is why it is playtest material), it is very possible that ether the rune knight has currently been scrapped or it might soon be seen in official material or be seen in a new revision, we dont know. [redacted]
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
It's literally the same things as barbarian...I mean the enlarge spell and Barb share things too but the fact they have almost the exact same wording and effects isn't even debating it's just fact.
Rune Knight basically gets Shield spell (except better because you can choose whomever in 60ft) infinitely for free. On top of that they get a rune with permanent bonuses plus a short rest ability. Even if they have to swap a rune out to get the effect they want it's still far and away better than any level 7 fighter feature and it's not even close.
My issue is that "flavor" makes people seemingly blind to terrible balance of mechanics. Brute was a fine subclass that got deemed "broken" despite no real evidence to the fact.
Yes the flavor was a bit on the boring side and the higher level features needed some tweaking but the overwhelming vitrol for the Subclass doomed it.
Then they go and release something so bloated with powerful features but it gets nothing but love and calls for it to be printed as is.
Overall I'm resigned to the fact I will have to run the brute as Homebrew.
Also your language is not appreciated. So good day to you and I hope your day is as pleasant as you are.....
[redacted]
Enlarge and Giant might have almost identical effects, like Giant might has a slightly diffrent way of changing size (but to an medium creature it will be the same) whilst being a little bit less descriptive in exactly how much your height and weight increases, and giant growth has an slightly bigger dice. That is all the differences between them.
Giant growth and rage have effects similar enough to at least be compared, but not nearly the same, rage has a flat bonus, Giant growth has an variable damage bonus, rage gives resistances, giant growth does not, rage can be ended early, both intentionally or otherwise, giant growth cannot, rage is not magical, giant growth is, rage cannot be used in heavy armor, giant growth can, rage prevents concentration and spellcasting, giant growth does not.
Considering how damm similar Enlarge is to Giant might, i think it is more likely that the designers thought okay, we have this arcane magic fighter related to giants, and we have this arcane spell that makes people large and lets them deal extra damage, so how about we make the rune knight feature an ever so slightly stronger version of that spell rather than it going okay how about we take rage, and then we change almost everything that makes rage rage.
the end results may be similar, some advantage on strength checks and some extra damage, but you have to admit, it is more likely that the feature is based on enlarge/ reduce, rather than rage
i have nothing against the brute, heck if flavoured a little bit smarter it could work really well
eh my day has been fine, you have been frustrating as all hell to talk to, but i have better thing to do than to argue with you, if you wanna belive that giant form or whatever is based of rage, no matter how unlikely that belief is, then i probably have more important things to do than to convice you of anything else
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
Even if the Rune Knight is meant to be the new brute (it's not), the flavor change is what makes it win.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I don't think that it's hypocritical to like a giant based rune carving fighter subclass with half a brain instead of a stupid barbarian-based brute fighter subclass.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I'll miss brute as someone who just wanted to play an ordinary Joe fighter whose one talent is they hit things on average a bit harder than most. Brute was, in my opinion, the most generally applicable fighter subclass.
Champion does nothing for me. I'm not into crit fishing, being marginally better at physical skills I'm already mediocre at isn't too big a concern, and most campaigns won't make it to level 10 enough for a second fighting style to matter.
Then you miss the entire point my post and only prove my point that the focus is is on "Flavor" over mechanical balance.
You focus only on the "Flavor" of the classes and not the particular issues they were criticized, particularly the mechanical balance and perception of what is "Broken" mechanically.
Rune Knight is in a much greater need for mechanical balancing and "nerfing" than brute ever was.
I really enjoy the flavor of them both and honestly Barbarian doesnt get to own the "tough figther" cliche anymore than Ranger gets to own the master of the land cliche now that Scout Rogue is a thing.
I didn't miss your post, but the abilities you're arguing are a rip off of the barbarian are not meant to be a rip off of the barbarian. Also, the similarities end after 3rd level.
I did focus only on flavor in my last post, because even if at level 3 they accomplish very similar things, the flavor is what makes people like the early level Rune Knight so much more than the Brute. Brute just seemed too similar to the Champion and Barbarian for the community's liking (not saying I didn't like it, I did), so they abandoned it.
Rune Knight does function similarly at level 3 (even though it is more powerful) and does need some nerfing. As has been stated many times on many threads, they have said that they purposely make the UA's too powerful so that they can nerf them later. Whether or not this statement makes sense or is even true is up for debate, but that's what Jeremy Crawford said.
Yes, I agree that classes don't own their niche of D&D, but the community and Wizards tends to disagree with that. Scout Rogue exists, and is better at being a ranger than the ranger ever will be, but that doesn't mean that it's encroaching on the Ranger's territory just because it can accomplish similar things and is cooler.
Sure, at level 3, the Rune Knight can mechanically be a better Brute for awhile, but once you get to the later abilities, it becomes abundantly clear that it isn't a rip off of the Brute. Whether or not they took inspiration from the barbarian or Brute subclass is something we may never know. The fact is that they are similar at the base level, but end up very different.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms