That's helpful. The other useful thing about it is if you have someone who's in melee with a character you don't want them in melee with, you can now slide them away while still dealing damage to them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
Detrimentally narrow viewpoint.
UA, generally, is for the purpose of playtesting potential new features, to get an outside opinion beyond the scope of the designer's bubble. This data can give designers insights into things they were unsure of, things they overlooked, etc, to better inform their design decision for further iteration.
The CFV UA, specifically, was an experiment to evaluate a set of possible changes, which individual DMs had the option of using or not using, to perhaps improve the QoL of playing the classes to which they were assigned. Some classes, lik the Ranger, were an extremely popular success, but raised the concern of 1 level dips into the class from others. Others, like the Sorcerer, were interesting options that were viewed as popular, but ultimately didn't address any of the problems of the class.
It's correct that the CFV UA was not meant to solve the problems, however, it's reasonable to assume that any changes resulting from that UA would have the intention of making the affected classes better. While not the same as buffing the class, it suggests a deeper intention.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
Detrimentally narrow viewpoint.
UA, generally, is for the purpose of playtesting potential new features, to get an outside opinion beyond the scope of the designer's bubble. This data can give designers insights into things they were unsure of, things they overlooked, etc, to better inform their design decision for further iteration.
The CFV UA, specifically, was an experiment to evaluate a set of possible changes, which individual DMs had the option of using or not using, to perhaps improve the QoL of playing the classes to which they were assigned. Some classes, lik the Ranger, were an extremely popular success, but raised the concern of 1 level dips into the class from others. Others, like the Sorcerer, were interesting options that were viewed as popular, but ultimately didn't address any of the problems of the class.
It's correct that the CFV UA was not meant to solve the problems, however, it's reasonable to assume that any changes resulting from that UA would have the intention of making the affected classes better. While not the same as buffing the class, it suggests a deeper intention.
This is very accurate.
My hope is that when they ask for feedback for this UA, they'll hear the response saying "Metamagic Adept is a cool idea that makes me realize how badly the Sorcerer needs some support in terms of exclusive Metamagic options. It's the only thing the class has going for it but it never gets more exciting after the initial ability unlock at level 3."
Sorc and Ranger are literally the only classes I can't find a single interesting character concept for and that is a tragedy.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
My hope is that when they ask for feedback for this UA, they'll hear the response saying "Metamagic Adept is a cool idea that makes me realize how badly the Sorcerer needs some support in terms of exclusive Metamagic options. It's the only thing the class has going for it but it never gets more exciting after the initial ability unlock at level 3."
Sorc and Ranger are literally the only classes I can't find a single interesting character concept for and that is a tragedy.
For me, the tragedy is not that I can't come up with interesting character concepts for those classes, but it's that I can come up with those concepts, and they fall short in mechanical execution. It's similar with Monks as well, but they're not as much of a problem as Sorcerers and Rangers.
I also hope that the general consensus in the feedback for this UA is that it raises the issues of the Sorcerer and Ranger being lackluster, instead of that they don't like these feats. If WotC does get that feedback, I hope they don't back off and decide to drop this UA, I hope they make this UA while fixing the problematic classes and features.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
It is off topic, but the issues brought up in this thread are part of why I think a 5.5 edition would be good for the game, even if it angers those that don't want to buy new books.
My hope is that when they ask for feedback for this UA, they'll hear the response saying "Metamagic Adept is a cool idea that makes me realize how badly the Sorcerer needs some support in terms of exclusive Metamagic options. It's the only thing the class has going for it but it never gets more exciting after the initial ability unlock at level 3."
I don't think Metamagic needs exclusive options. Sorcerers just need more Sorcery Points to give them breathing room to actually use them.
I kinda wish that at high levels they had more lower level slots. Something along the lines of 6 1st, 5 2nd, 5 3rd, 4 4th. Also, flesh out every Origin with an expanded spell list, a set of thematic spells that fit the Origin. The Clockwork Soul UA Origin has this. The others should all too.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
With regards to the Ranger, generally, I feel the CFV actually fixes all the issues with the base class. The special variant Beasts for the Beastmaster are a step in the right direction, but need more interaction to make them work. Also, more of them then just 2.
My hope is that when they ask for feedback for this UA, they'll hear the response saying "Metamagic Adept is a cool idea that makes me realize how badly the Sorcerer needs some support in terms of exclusive Metamagic options. It's the only thing the class has going for it but it never gets more exciting after the initial ability unlock at level 3."
I don't think Metamagic needs exclusive options. Sorcerers just need more Sorcery Points to give them breathing room to actually use them.
I kinda wish that at high levels they had more lower level slots. Something along the lines of 6 1st, 5 2nd, 5 3rd, 4 4th. Also, flesh out every Origin with an expanded spell list, a set of thematic spells that fit the Origin. The Clockwork Soul UA Origin has this. The others should all too.
Sorcerers need more than more sorcery points, but that would be a start. They also need more spells known (I agree it should probably be from subclasses), more versatility, and other changes, but that's neither here nor there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
With regards to the Ranger, generally, I feel the CFV actually fixes all the issues with the base class. The special variant Beasts for the Beastmaster are a step in the right direction, but need more interaction to make them work. Also, more of them then just 2.
The ranger was fixed quite a bit by that UA, but it still needs a few changes. The sorcerer wasn't fixed at all by the CFV UA, and they should do something similar to the overhaul they did for the Ranger in that UA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
With regards to the Ranger, generally, I feel the CFV actually fixes all the issues with the base class. The special variant Beasts for the Beastmaster are a step in the right direction, but need more interaction to make them work. Also, more of them then just 2.
Personally, I find the CFV to be great and will solve many issues, but you don't have to do much scrolling to find posts saying that it doesn't do enough to help the Sorcerer. I don't know what the end result will be for the CFV, but I would be willing to bet that there will still be lots of unhappy Sorcerer players out there.
The Class Feature Variants UA did absolutely nothing to address the problem with Sorcerers, and this UA does basically the same thing.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
Totally agree about the ranger would need a full rewrite however the Sorcerer could be fixed quite easily with errata. 1. Sorcerers use the wizard spell list 2. Font of magic is 1SP = 1 spell level. 3. Metamagic can be changed whenever you gain a level of sorcerer.
In all the times I have played I have never seen anyone give a help action instead of attacking cast a spell or what not. Some of these can have a nice little niche like a Wizard with a quarterstaff has an enemy next to him and he knows the enemy has sentinel, if the wizard has mobile he swings then runs away if he has crusher if he hits and knocks the enemy back 5' feet next to an ally and runs away if enemy follows they can be attacked unless they disengaged or what have you. My biggest like about these feats is options for players for there characters so they are not the same as everyone else of the same class.
In any of those times, did anyone get to use Help as a bonus action and at range?
No this was before the mastermind was released, I like them but I prefer the Inquisitive rogue myself as I really like Snipers and they are awesome at that.
Disagree. The Sorcerer Spell List needs to be expanded to be more on par with the Wizard Spell List, but there needs to be some differentiation between them. It's just egregiously ridiculous how it is now. There are upwards of 200 spells on the Wizard list not on the Sorcerer list, but something like 10 spells on the Sorcerer list not on the Wizard list.
What spells should be where should, naturally, vary based on how scholastic vs instinctual they are.
Font of Magic should convert as 1 Sorcery Point per level of the spell slot.
I'm indifferent to this. I think it would be better to simply double the size of the Sorcery Point pool. So when you get Font of Magic you have 4 points (which you can't use on anything other than spell slots...) instead of 2, then at level 3 you'd have 6 instead of 3, and so on. The existing pool is just so small that you have to be extremely careful how you use it or you run out and don't have any left to do anything. Such a small cap also makes it hard to use certain expensive options because their costs scale so high.
Sorcerers should be able to change Metamagic whenever they gain a Sorcerer level
I am also indifferent to this. I am of the opinion that it takes something away from the inherent flavor of the class to allow swapping freely. Though this isn't really freely, it's only on level gain. But... it doesn't sit right with me to alter this.
Would it really be so problematic to give sorcerers all metamagics at once? They will still be limited by their available sorcery points. Maybe then the sorcerer would more frequently use some of the more niche metamagics that they would otherwise rarely pick. That would also allow the metamagic feat from this UA to be somewhat useful while still only granting a relatively small portion of the sorcerer's metamagic ability.
Would it really be so problematic to give sorcerers all metamagics at once? They will still be limited by their available sorcery points. Maybe then the sorcerer would more frequently use some of the more niche metamagics that they would otherwise rarely pick. That would also allow the metamagic feat from this UA to be somewhat useful while still only granting a relatively small portion of the sorcerer's metamagic ability.
In my game I housruled that our sorcerer could change his metamagic picks after a long rest. The reasoning we had (he and I worked on this together) was that we wanted the decision of which one to have available at a given time to be somewhat tactical (you know you are going into a situation, and that this option would be more useful than that one). I also let him change his spells on a long rest.
When this new feat list came out, he sent it to me and I immediately knew which one he wanted. I reminded him that the reason we went with "change your metamagic on long rest" was because he only gets 2 MMs until level 10. If he gets 4 of the 8 right out of the gate, will he really need to change them that often?
I then said, "If I give you the choice of our houserule about changing MM, or taking this feat, which would you take?" He chose the feat.
Just a little anecdote.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Disagree. The Sorcerer Spell List needs to be expanded to be more on par with the Wizard Spell List, but there needs to be some differentiation between them. It's just egregiously ridiculous how it is now. There are upwards of 200 spells on the Wizard list not on the Sorcerer list, but something like 10 spells on the Sorcerer list not on the Wizard list.
I think that Sorcerer's should still use their own list, but get alot of unique spells.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
This is awesome! I'm a little sad about the prerequisite clause in Eldritch Adept requiring warlock levels, but I suppose a full Sorcerer/Bard/Paladin+Spell Sniper (Eldritch Blast)+Eldritch Adept (Agonizing Blast) is just a bit silly. Like others have said, it really seems like we'll get Xanathar's 2.0 this year.... is it too much to hope for expanded Racial Feats?
The prerequisite for Eldritch Adept is Pact Magic OR the Spellcasting Feature. This applies to quite a number of classes and some subclasses. So you could theoretically Make something like an Eldritch Knight with this feat. Or even a Paladin or Ranger.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That's helpful. The other useful thing about it is if you have someone who's in melee with a character you don't want them in melee with, you can now slide them away while still dealing damage to them.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The purpose of UA is not to address a problem with a class. The fact that this UA did not attempt to address a problem with a class is appropriate and correct.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Detrimentally narrow viewpoint.
UA, generally, is for the purpose of playtesting potential new features, to get an outside opinion beyond the scope of the designer's bubble. This data can give designers insights into things they were unsure of, things they overlooked, etc, to better inform their design decision for further iteration.
The CFV UA, specifically, was an experiment to evaluate a set of possible changes, which individual DMs had the option of using or not using, to perhaps improve the QoL of playing the classes to which they were assigned. Some classes, lik the Ranger, were an extremely popular success, but raised the concern of 1 level dips into the class from others. Others, like the Sorcerer, were interesting options that were viewed as popular, but ultimately didn't address any of the problems of the class.
It's correct that the CFV UA was not meant to solve the problems, however, it's reasonable to assume that any changes resulting from that UA would have the intention of making the affected classes better. While not the same as buffing the class, it suggests a deeper intention.
This is very accurate.
My hope is that when they ask for feedback for this UA, they'll hear the response saying "Metamagic Adept is a cool idea that makes me realize how badly the Sorcerer needs some support in terms of exclusive Metamagic options. It's the only thing the class has going for it but it never gets more exciting after the initial ability unlock at level 3."
Sorc and Ranger are literally the only classes I can't find a single interesting character concept for and that is a tragedy.
I guess you've never seen Class Feature Variants or Revised Ranger, then. You are correct on part of the second part, this UA did not attempt to address a problem with existing classes, which is kind of the problem. It opened up a can of worms without being prepared to deal with them.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
For me, the tragedy is not that I can't come up with interesting character concepts for those classes, but it's that I can come up with those concepts, and they fall short in mechanical execution. It's similar with Monks as well, but they're not as much of a problem as Sorcerers and Rangers.
I also hope that the general consensus in the feedback for this UA is that it raises the issues of the Sorcerer and Ranger being lackluster, instead of that they don't like these feats. If WotC does get that feedback, I hope they don't back off and decide to drop this UA, I hope they make this UA while fixing the problematic classes and features.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
As we know for certain from the Revised Ranger, we will never see a Revised class in this edition. The core of the classes will never be altered in this edition. The best we will see is the Class Feature Variant and apparently that still won't be enough. Truly fixing Sorcerer or Ranger would require a full rewrite. These Feats look to be a way to address Level Dipping, not fixing classes.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It is off topic, but the issues brought up in this thread are part of why I think a 5.5 edition would be good for the game, even if it angers those that don't want to buy new books.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I don't think Metamagic needs exclusive options. Sorcerers just need more Sorcery Points to give them breathing room to actually use them.
I kinda wish that at high levels they had more lower level slots. Something along the lines of 6 1st, 5 2nd, 5 3rd, 4 4th. Also, flesh out every Origin with an expanded spell list, a set of thematic spells that fit the Origin. The Clockwork Soul UA Origin has this. The others should all too.
With regards to the Ranger, generally, I feel the CFV actually fixes all the issues with the base class. The special variant Beasts for the Beastmaster are a step in the right direction, but need more interaction to make them work. Also, more of them then just 2.
Sorcerers need more than more sorcery points, but that would be a start. They also need more spells known (I agree it should probably be from subclasses), more versatility, and other changes, but that's neither here nor there.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The ranger was fixed quite a bit by that UA, but it still needs a few changes. The sorcerer wasn't fixed at all by the CFV UA, and they should do something similar to the overhaul they did for the Ranger in that UA.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Personally, I find the CFV to be great and will solve many issues, but you don't have to do much scrolling to find posts saying that it doesn't do enough to help the Sorcerer. I don't know what the end result will be for the CFV, but I would be willing to bet that there will still be lots of unhappy Sorcerer players out there.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Totally agree about the ranger would need a full rewrite however the Sorcerer could be fixed quite easily with errata. 1. Sorcerers use the wizard spell list 2. Font of magic is 1SP = 1 spell level. 3. Metamagic can be changed whenever you gain a level of sorcerer.
No this was before the mastermind was released, I like them but I prefer the Inquisitive rogue myself as I really like Snipers and they are awesome at that.
Disagree. The Sorcerer Spell List needs to be expanded to be more on par with the Wizard Spell List, but there needs to be some differentiation between them. It's just egregiously ridiculous how it is now. There are upwards of 200 spells on the Wizard list not on the Sorcerer list, but something like 10 spells on the Sorcerer list not on the Wizard list.
What spells should be where should, naturally, vary based on how scholastic vs instinctual they are.
I'm indifferent to this. I think it would be better to simply double the size of the Sorcery Point pool. So when you get Font of Magic you have 4 points (which you can't use on anything other than spell slots...) instead of 2, then at level 3 you'd have 6 instead of 3, and so on. The existing pool is just so small that you have to be extremely careful how you use it or you run out and don't have any left to do anything. Such a small cap also makes it hard to use certain expensive options because their costs scale so high.
I am also indifferent to this. I am of the opinion that it takes something away from the inherent flavor of the class to allow swapping freely. Though this isn't really freely, it's only on level gain. But... it doesn't sit right with me to alter this.
Would it really be so problematic to give sorcerers all metamagics at once? They will still be limited by their available sorcery points. Maybe then the sorcerer would more frequently use some of the more niche metamagics that they would otherwise rarely pick. That would also allow the metamagic feat from this UA to be somewhat useful while still only granting a relatively small portion of the sorcerer's metamagic ability.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
In my game I housruled that our sorcerer could change his metamagic picks after a long rest. The reasoning we had (he and I worked on this together) was that we wanted the decision of which one to have available at a given time to be somewhat tactical (you know you are going into a situation, and that this option would be more useful than that one). I also let him change his spells on a long rest.
When this new feat list came out, he sent it to me and I immediately knew which one he wanted. I reminded him that the reason we went with "change your metamagic on long rest" was because he only gets 2 MMs until level 10. If he gets 4 of the 8 right out of the gate, will he really need to change them that often?
I then said, "If I give you the choice of our houserule about changing MM, or taking this feat, which would you take?" He chose the feat.
Just a little anecdote.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think that Sorcerer's should still use their own list, but get alot of unique spells.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
The prerequisite for Eldritch Adept is Pact Magic OR the Spellcasting Feature. This applies to quite a number of classes and some subclasses. So you could theoretically Make something like an Eldritch Knight with this feat. Or even a Paladin or Ranger.